2. The fact that the defendant confessions the crime of this case and reflects his mistake, and that there are circumstances that can be considered in the intention of defraudation is favorable to the defendant.

However, the fact that the amount of fraud (17.1 million won) is not much, the period of performing the international marriage brokerage business without registration is longer, the damage caused by fraud is not recovered, and the fact that there has been a history of being sentenced to a fine once due to fraud is disadvantageous to the defendant.

Considering the above circumstances and motive leading to the instant crime, the circumstances after the commission of the crime, the age of the accused, character and conduct, family relationship, environment, occupation, etc., there is no change in circumstances to determine the punishment differently from the original judgment, and the scope of the recommended sentencing guidelines for the enactment of the Supreme Court Sentencing Committee [the scope of the recommended punishment] in the mitigation area (one month to one year for imprisonment) reduction area (one year for special mitigation) (one year for imprisonment), domination), or in a case where the degree of deception is weak, the scope of the final recommended sentence according to the standards for the management of multiple crimes: at least one month (the violation of the Act on the Management of Marriage Brokers Business for which no sentencing guidelines are set is set is related to the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and thus, the lower limit of the recommended sentence for the above fraud, on which the sentencing guidelines are set, shall not be considered to be unfair, and the Defendant’s assertion that the above sentencing guidelines is unfair.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.