The part concerning the 3 crime in the judgment shall be reversed.

One year of imprisonment with prison labor for the crimes of No. 3 of the judgment of the defendant.

A. The judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged despite the fact-misunderstanding and legal principles that the defendant did not deceiving the victim AF, the victim D, and the victim AM to acquire property or property benefits by deceiving the victim, is erroneous in the misunderstanding of facts and of legal principles.

B. The punishment sentenced by the court below against the defendant (the 4 years of imprisonment with prison labor for the crimes No. 1 and 2 in its holding and the 3 years of imprisonment with prison labor for the crimes No. 3 in its holding) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court rendered ex officio judgment that, among the facts charged, sentenced the victim AM to imprisonment with prison labor for a year after adding and reducing repeated offenses to the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud) for the victim AM (the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (the defendant's High Court's High Court's High Court's High Court's 20

However, the statutory punishment for the above facts charged is imprisonment with prison labor for more than three years, and the punishment for a repeated crime is imprisonment with prison labor for more than one year and six months and less than twenty-five years after the aggravation of repeated crimes and mitigation of the amount of punishment, so the sentence of the lower court is unlawful as it goes beyond the scope of the punishment.

Therefore, this part of the judgment of the court below is reversed and judged again.

B. We examine the grounds for appeal by the defendant as to each crime in the holding of the court below, including the crime No. 3 of the judgment below that reversed ex officio as to the grounds for appeal.

1) Examining the evidence duly admitted by the lower court, the evidence duly examined, and the statements made by the witness F in this court in light of the records and relevant legal principles, it is reasonable for the lower court to find the Defendant guilty of all the charges of this case on the grounds as stated in its reasoning.

The defendant's argument disputing the establishment of each of the above crimes is without merit.

2) We examine the Defendant’s wrongful assertion of sentencing on each of the crimes Nos. 1 and 2 of the holding of the lower judgment.

The sentencing is based on the statutory penalty, within the reasonable and appropriate scope, on the basis of the conditions for the sentencing prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act.