2. The rationale behind the judgment is that the defendant's criminal act is divided by imprisonment for not less than three months, and that the defendant should consider the equity between the case and the case of violation of the Attorney-at-Law Act, etc. for which the judgment has become final and conclusive.

However, in light of the fact that the fraud method of the crime of this case is not good, the amount of fraud is not written, the damage is not recovered, and the defendant did not agree with the victims, the defendant committed the crime of this case without being aware of it during the suspension period of execution of the same crime even though he had been sentenced once to the punishment prior to the crime of this case, twice a suspended execution, and one time a fine, and other various matters stipulated in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, which are the conditions for sentencing, such as the defendant's age, character and behavior, character and environment, which are shown in the records and arguments of this case, are too unreasonable.

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