2. The lower court rendered the above sentence in consideration of the favorable circumstances, such as the Defendant’s payment of wages short of the minimum wage for a considerable period of time to workers and the high level of criticism, and the recognition of and rebuttal against the instant crime, and the smooth agreement with the victims, respectively.

In addition to the circumstances considered by the court below, the fact that the defendant has been sentenced to a fine for the same kind of crime shall be considered disadvantageously.

In full view of the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, health, circumstances leading to the commission of a crime, means and result, scale of a crime and circumstances after a crime, etc., which can be known through records and pleadings, the sentence sentenced by the lower court appears to be reasonable, and the lower court’s sentencing judgment exceeded the reasonable bounds of discretion.

There is no circumstance that the assessment or maintenance thereof is deemed unfair (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). Therefore, it is difficult to deem that the sentence imposed by the lower court is unfair because it is too unreasonable as the Defendant alleged.

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.