A. The Defendant had no or weak ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of each of the instant crimes due to alcohol dependence, depression, etc.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the process, means and method of each of the crimes in this case, the defendant's behavior before and after the crime was committed, etc. as to the assertion of mental disorder, it does not appear that the defendant had lost or weak ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of each of the crimes in this case. Thus, this part of the defendant's assertion is rejected.

B. As to the assertion on unfair sentencing, most of the Defendant recognized the Defendant’s criminal acts, and the amount of damage is relatively large to KRW 3 million in total, the Defendant’s past records of punishment for fraud, including ten times before and after the sentence is imposed, and the Defendant has been punished several times due to fraud under the same law, and the Defendant repeatedly commits each of the instant crimes within the repeated period even though he/she was punished several times, despite the number of victims, and the number of victims did not agree with the victims until now, and there was no particular measure to recover from damage, and the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family environment, and circumstances leading to the crime, etc. do not seem to be unreasonable. Accordingly, this part of the Defendant’s assertion is rejected.

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.