2. In determining punishment against the Defendant, the lower court determined a sentence by comprehensively taking into account all the sentencing conditions set forth in the arguments of the instant case, including the Defendant’s age, sex, and environment, taking into account the following factors: (a) the total sum of the crimes of the instant case reaches KRW 230,00,000; (b) the majority of the victims and the Defendant were mobilized for the purpose of omitting the victims into mistake; (c) there was no agreement with the victims or no completion of the recovery of damage; (d) the Defendant was sentenced several times of criminal convictions; and (e) the Defendant was finally sentenced several times of criminal convictions due to frauds; and (e) the Defendant committed each of the instant crimes within the period of repeated crime after having been sentenced to punishment for frauds; and (e) the Defendant’s confessions and reflects all of the crimes of the instant case

Examining the above sentencing of the lower court in light of the record, the lower court’s determination of sentencing exceeded the reasonable bounds of its discretion.

There is no change in circumstances to regard that maintaining the sentencing of the court below is unfair in the trial.

Ultimately, the lower court’s punishment is appropriate, and it cannot be deemed unfair because it is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is not accepted.

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.