2. The fact that the defendant in a judgment on the grounds of appeal is likely to not repeat again while reflecting his/her mistake, that the defendant pays part of the defrauded money to the victim, thereby recovering part of the damage within the scope, and that the balance with the case where the judgment is to be rendered simultaneously with the crime where the judgment has become final and conclusive is favorable to the defendant.

On the other hand, the defendant abused trust relationship with the victim and committed the crime of this case, but the nature of the crime is not good, the defendant repeated the crime even though there have been many records of punishment for the same crime of fraud, and the extent of damage caused by the crime of this case is not small, but most of the damage is still not recovered, and the victim's wishing to punish the defendant is disadvantageous to the defendant.

In addition, in full view of the Defendant’s age, character, conduct and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and all of the sentencing factors indicated in the instant records and pleadings, such as the circumstances after the crime was committed, the lower court’s sentence is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

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