2. In light of the circumstances that are favorable to the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant misleads the defendant and commits a mistake, the occurrence of actual damage by the damaged financial institution is relatively less than the amount of the fraud, the damage is fully recovered, and the defendant seems to have neglected to take part in the crime of this case compared to other accomplices. However, the court below seems to have imposed the above fine in consideration of these circumstances, and there is no change in circumstances that can change the above punishment of the court below in the trial, and the crime of this case is obtained by means of deceiving financial institutions by forging or using private documents after the defendant lends his name, and the crime of this case is not less than 125 million won, such as the fact that the amount of the fraud was not less than 125 million won, and the fact that the defendant got punished twice as the same crime of this case even though he had the history of being punished twice as the crime of this case, the court below's punishment is unreasonable by comprehensively taking into account all the circumstances such as the defendant's age, age, character and behavior, and circumstances after the crime of this case.

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 as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

(However, in the application of the laws and regulations of the court below, the part within the scope of "1. concurrent crimes" shall be stated "in the case of concurrent crimes with punishment determined by the most severe fraud," and it shall be corrected by Article 25 of the Rules on Criminal Procedure.