2. We examine the following facts: (a) the Defendant recognized all of the crimes of this case and against his mistake; and (b) the need to consider the equity between fraud for which a judgment was made on all the facts constituting the crime of this case as indicated in the judgment of the court below and the case for which a judgment is to be rendered simultaneously under Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act

However, the Defendant committed each of the instant crimes repeatedly and repeatedly even though he had the history of punishment several times due to the same crime, and the Defendant did not agree with the victims and did not make any effort to recover from damage. ③ The crime of this case is not less complicated than the nature of the crime in comparison with the so-called “unfiting” act of taking the victims into account the so-called “unfiting” act by deceiving the victims, and taking advantage of other factors such as the Defendant’s age, family environment, and circumstances before and after the crime, etc., it cannot be deemed that the Defendant’s punishment is too unreasonable.

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