2. In light of the judgment, the fact that the defendant shows an attitude to recognize and reflect the defendant's mistake in the first instance, and that some of the circumstances that can be considered in the living environment, such as the defendant's health status, can be considered, are favorable to the defendant.

However, the crime of this case is a situation unfavorable to the defendant, even though the defendant is able to carry out various projects, such as the establishment of a newspaper company, even though he/she does not have an intent and ability to do so, by deceiving 200 million won from the damaged person while he/she does not forge the various documents in the name of M and N, and is recorded in the register of the juristic person as stated in the forged document by exercising it, and the nature of such crime is not good, the amount acquired by the defendant is large, and the damage is not recovered at all, and the defendant has a

In full view of all other factors of sentencing indicated in the records, including the Defendant’s age, environment, sex, and circumstances after the crime, the lower court’s sentence is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. As such, the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition (Provided, That each “S name” of the acts No. 19 and No. 20 acts on the 4th page 19 of the judgment of the court below is obvious that it is an “N name” clerical error, and thus, ex officio rectification is made in accordance with Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure.