2. In light of the fact that the Defendant recovered most of the money that the Defendant paid to the Victim F as the high school acquisition fee from the victim, the Defendant committed the instant crime in order to receive more dispute as to whether there was a duty to return, and that some of the instant crimes interfere with the appropriate exercise of judicial power and the confidence of the people in the fairness of the judicial agencies and investigative agencies, etc., there is a need to strictly punish the Defendant due to the nature of the crime.

On the other hand, there are circumstances favorable to the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant has no criminal history, and that the defendant has committed a crime that was denied before the trial, and that the defendant has reached an agreement with the victim F at the investigation stage, and that the victims do not want the punishment of the defendant by agreement with the victim P.

Ultimately, considering the various circumstances, such as the motive and circumstance of each of the instant crimes, frequency, circumstances after the crime, Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, etc., and the sentencing conditions specified in the instant records and arguments, the sentence of the lower court is deemed appropriate.

3. In conclusion, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.