2. The Korean Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the direct principle, should respect the sentencing determination in cases where there exists a unique area of the first instance court, and there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the first instance court’s sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Defendant recognized and reflected the instant crime.

In addition, there is no criminal power.

G Co., Ltd. among the victims of this case is not subject to punishment after cancelling the complaint against H, who is an accomplice.

Although the defendant escaped from China after this case, he voluntarily entered Korea.

However, while the amount of fraud of this case exceeds KRW 300 million, the damage has not been recovered, and there seems to be no room for recovery in the future.

The Defendant, among the crimes of this case, went to China on about 19 years from the last crime of this case and escaped from China for about 10 years.

In addition, there is no new change in the circumstances that can change the sentence of the court below in the trial.

Considering the above circumstances and the sentencing conditions, such as character, conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s sentence cannot be deemed to be unfair because it goes beyond the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. Accordingly, 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.