2. The lower court sentenced two years, taking into account the circumstances favorable to the Defendant and unfavorable circumstances, as well as the sentencing guidelines of the Supreme Court’s sentencing committee (eight months to four years of imprisonment) / [the scope of recommending punishment] of the general fraud / [the scope of punishment] described in the basic area (8 months to four years) (8 months) of the basic area: the number of concurrent crimes, one step increase (no special person subject to sentencing) as a result of single concurrent crimes.

When comprehensively considering the conditions for sentencing in the trial, the sentencing of the court below exceeded the reasonable scope of its discretion, and the sentencing guidelines, the sentencing of the court below exceeded the reasonable scope of its discretion.

There is no circumstance that it is unfair to maintain the judgment of the court below as it is or that the judgment of the court below is unfair.

In addition, even if the defendant's age, sex, environment, circumstances, and result of the crime, etc. are considered, the sentence of the court below is proper and too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's argument of sentencing is without merit.

3. 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 for conclusion is without merit.

On the other hand, Article 25 (1) of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure is clear that “G” in Section 1 of the judgment of the court below is a clerical error in “I”. Thus, ex officio correction is made pursuant to Article 25 (1) of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure.