2. A favorable circumstance is that the Defendant recognized each of the instant crimes and reflected his mistake, and that part of the damaged amount of the victim F appears to have been returned.

On the other hand, the fact that the amount of damage exceeds about KRW 90 million, the fact that the victim did not agree with the victims, and the fact that the defendant committed each of the crimes of this case even three times, even though he was punished for the same crime, is disadvantageous.

In full view of the above circumstances and the facts that there are no special circumstances or changes in circumstances that may be newly considered after the pronouncement of the lower judgment, all of the factors indicated in the arguments in the instant case, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, family relationship, motive for committing a crime, means and consequence of a crime, and the scope of recommended sentences based on the sentencing guidelines established by the Supreme Court sentencing committee, the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable as it is too unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

[Provided, That pursuant to Article 25 (1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, each of the following parts of the original judgment shall be corrected ex officio:

The judgment below

(1) The court below’s decision No. 5 No. 2 of the List 1 of the Crimes No. 4 is to correct the “amount of money (cost)” as “the amount of money acquired” of the List 1 of the Offenses No. 4 as “the amount of money acquired”, and the court below’s decision’s decision No. 1 as “the date of August 7, 2015” No. 5 of the List 2 of the Crimes List 5.