2. The circumstances favorable to the Defendant include the fact that the Defendant appears to be against the instant crime, that it appears that the victims were recovered by C, an accomplice, and that the Defendant was the first offender who has no criminal history.

On the other hand, the crime of this case is committed by the defendant and his accomplices, including C, who enticed the victims while operating an entertainment drinking house, and threatened them with the victims, or took them by taking advantage of the situation in which the victims' consciousness was faced, and it is not very good that the crime of this case is committed, and it is inevitable to punish them more systematically and systematically. The defendant takes charge of the execution of the crime of this case, such as making fakes directly and threatening the victims, and receiving credit cards from victims, etc., and taking charge of the leading and core roles together with C; the victims are many victims and the victims have not made no effort to recover the victims' damage; the defendant escaped from the investigation of the crime of this case in around 208; and the defendant was arrested on around August 201, and the risk of repeating the criminal procedure is also disadvantageous to the defendant.

In full view of the above circumstances and other circumstances that lead to the instant crime, the circumstances after the commission of the crime, the age of the Defendant, character and conduct, family relationship, environment, occupation, etc., and the conditions of sentencing as shown in the records and arguments, and there is no change in circumstances to determine the sentence differently from the original judgment, the lower court’s sentence is too unreasonable, and thus, the Defendant’s allegation of unfair sentencing is acceptable.