A. Defendant: The sentence of the lower court (four years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor: The lower court’s sentence is too uneasible.

2. The Defendant, throughout a year and five months, acquired the victim a total of at least KRW 10.5 billion under the pretext of investment by deceiving the victim on the ground of the processing business.

The criminal law is very closely consistent by presenting the details of the processed goods transaction to the victim and manipulating the details of the deposit deposit and withdrawal.

It did not make a serious effort to recover damage after the detection of the crime, and the victim wants to punish the defendant.

Such circumstances are disadvantageous to the defendant.

On the other hand, in the process of receiving repeated investments from the victim, the defendant returned the remaining amount excluding KRW 870 million out of the principal of investment to the victim, and paid KRW 430 million under the name of the profit, and the actual amount of damage does not exceed the above fraud amount.

Except for the case where a suspended sentence of six months after the crime of this case was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for the crime of embezzlement, the defendant has no record of crime, and the balance between the crime of this case and the case where a judgment becomes final and conclusive at the same time shall also be considered.

These circumstances are favorable to the defendant.

In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the first instance court’s sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable for the appellate court to respect the first instance court’s sentencing (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In full view of the aforementioned circumstances and the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, family relationship, motive and circumstance of the crime, and the scope of recommended sentencing according to the sentencing guidelines established by the Supreme Court’s sentencing committee, the lower court’s sentence is too heavy or unreasonable.