2. It is recognized that the Defendant’s confession and reflects the instant crime, the amount of damage is not so significant, the amount of damage is repaid at the investigation stage, and the Defendant agreed smoothly with the victim, and if this judgment becomes final and conclusive, there is a possibility that the suspended sentence will be invalidated.

However, on May 4, 2018, the Defendant committed the instant crime during the period of probation as he was sentenced to two years of imprisonment with prison labor for the same type of fraud and was sentenced to two years, and committed the instant crime during the period of probation; the community service order added to the above probation judgment was not faithfully performed; the Defendant’s participation in the instant crime is highly harmful to society through the formation of a large number of victims as a planned and organized group against many unspecified persons; and the Defendant, in the entire organization, received the victims directly from the entire organization of the crime and received the damages, and delivered them to other accomplices. In the process, the degree of participation in the instant crime is not easy; in the process, the degree of participation in the crime is not easy; there is no good evidence of the nature of the crime by forging the official document under the name of the Chairman of the Financial Services Commission to use it; otherwise, there is no special circumstance or change of circumstances to newly consider the sentencing in the trial; in full view of the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family relationship, motive, method and method of the instant crime and circumstances, etc.

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

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