2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the judgment of the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). It is recognized that the Defendant confessions and reflects the Defendant, and that the Defendant does not have any previous meaning.

However, in full view of the various circumstances shown in the records and pleadings of this case, such as the fact that the amount of fraud exceeds 30 million won, the fact that the defendant was unable to obtain a letter from the victim, and there is no change in circumstances that could be sentenced in the trial of the party, the punishment sentenced by the court below against the defendant is not heavy.

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

(2) Of the application of Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, it is apparent that the phrase “within the scope of the total of the long-term punishments of the above two crimes” was omitted by mistake in the column of aggravation of concurrent crimes among the application of the judgment of the lower court.