2. The Defendant appears to be against the Defendant’s recognition of the instant crime and agreed with AL (the amount of damage) among the victims during the trial. However, the instant crime was committed in advance, such as: (a) not only repeatedly committed against many and unspecified persons engaged in real estate brokerage business for a considerable period of time, but also making it more specific to make the victims feel doubtful than those who actually purchased the house; (b) even though the total amount of damage is not much specified, most damage is not recovered; (c) the Defendant has been committed five previous times in total; (d) the sentence of imprisonment exceeds four times; and (e) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, and circumstances after committing the instant crime, etc., the sentence of the lower court against the Defendant is too unreasonable in light of all the sentencing conditions indicated in the record of the instant case, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, and circumstances after committing the instant crime.

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