2. The judgment of the defendant A also recognized the crime No. 2 of the facts charged against the defendant for the first time in the trial, and the defendant's wife wishesed to repent of the defendant's prior wife.

Defendant

B appears to have led to the instant crime due to difficult economic circumstances, and there is no criminal history. However, the instant crime is an abuse of the employee’s entire housing loan system operated with public funds to stabilize the residence of homeless workers, thereby ultimately threatening the foundation of the national welfare system. Therefore, it is necessary to strictly punish the instant crime.

In addition, in light of the fact that the applicable law to commit the instant crime is planned, the total amount of fraud is large to KRW 1,60,000,000, and up to now the damage has not been recovered and the loss incurred therefrom has to be ultimately appropriated for the national tax, and the damage can be returned to the people, etc., it is very bad to commit the instant crime.

In addition, in full view of the various circumstances that are conditions for sentencing, such as the age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the instant crime, and the circumstances after the crime, the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

3. The Defendants’ appeal is without merit, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.