2. The circumstances favorable to the Defendant are as follows: (a) the Defendant recognized the entire mistake and reflects the depth of the Defendant; (b) there is no particular criminal history for the Defendant; and (c) the Defendant applied for re-investigation and returned home; and (d) endeavored to conclude the instant case.

On the other hand, it is an unfavorable circumstance to the defendant, such as the fact that the amount acquired by deception is not a large amount, the defendant alters the tax invoice, which is a private document, and exercises it to conceal the crime of defraudation, and the fact that the crime is not good, the victim did not agree with the victim, and the victim want to punish the defendant up to the trial.

When comprehensively considering the above circumstances and the overall sentencing conditions of Article 51 of the Criminal Act as seen in the records and arguments of the instant case, the Defendant may recognize the fact that he/she returned part of the amount of damage to the instant facts charged to the victim, as alleged by the Defendant.

Even if the lower court’s punishment is too excessive and it is difficult to view that the Defendant’s statement that the Defendant was partially paid the amount of money (in light of the fact that there were many financial transactions between the Defendant and the victim in the investigation record, it is difficult to readily conclude that the Defendant’s statement was the statement that the victim received as part of the amount of damage inflicted on the instant charges and was deemed to have recovered from the damage). Therefore, the above assertion by

3. In conclusion, 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.