Part of the compensation order, except the compensation order, shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and ten months.

seizure.

A. The sentence imposed by the lower court (two years of imprisonment, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

B. The above sentence declared by the prosecutor by the court below is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to each of the unlawful arguments regarding sentencing by prosecutors and defendants, the defendant committed a crime of fraud in collusion with a person in a false name, and in particular, the victims actively deceiving the victims by presenting a forged document under the name of a financial institution during the course of the crime. In light of the background, method, frequency, total amount of damages, etc. of each of the crimes of this case, the criminal liability of the defendant was more serious, the fact that the defendant did not agree with a considerable number of victims, and the total amount of the amount of the irrecoverable damage is the maximum

However, the defendant shows the attitude of recognizing and opposing all crimes, the court below agreed with the victim AB in the judgment of the court below, and the victims do not want to be punished against the defendant under the agreement with the victim B and G, the profits that the defendant acquired by each of the crimes of this case are small amounts compared to the amount of fraud damage, and the first offender with no record of criminal punishment are favorable to the defendant.

In addition, in full view of various sentencing conditions as shown in the instant pleadings, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive and background of the offense, means and consequence of the offense, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court is deemed to be too unreasonable rather than to be somewhat weak.

Therefore, the prosecutor's improper argument of sentencing is without merit, and the defendant's improper argument of sentencing is with merit.

B. According to the records of ex officio determination on the compensation order portion on the applicant B of the original judgment, it is recognized that the defendant paid 4 million won to the applicant B of the original judgment and agreed on the compensation order.

Therefore, the application for compensation order by the applicant for compensation by the court below is the existence or scope of the compensation liability.