2. The Defendant is against the principle of good faith when he/she was found to have committed a crime against all.

Each of the crimes of this case is one of the concurrent crimes with the crimes for which each judgment of the court below has become final and conclusive, Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and it is necessary to consider equity in the case of concurrent crimes under Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act.

Such circumstances are favorable to the defendant.

On the other hand, each of the crimes of this case is not appropriate in light of the method of crime or the degree of intention of deception by acquiring money under the pretext of enabling the victims of illegal sojourn to be legalized.

There was no agreement with the victims, and there was no particular damage recovery.

Such circumstances are disadvantageous to the defendant.

In addition, in full view of all the matters that are the conditions for sentencing as shown in the arguments and records, such as the defendant's age, career, sex, environment, family relationship, health status, motive and consequence of the crime, means and consequence thereof, circumstances after the crime, and the scale of the sum of defraudation, the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable.

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