2. The instant case is the case in which the Defendant, even if the Defendant borrowed money or purchased goods, by deceiving the victims of the money or goods in the name of the borrowed money, although there is no intent or ability to repay the money.

The lower court sentenced the Defendant for a period of six years and six years, taking into account the following: (a) under favorable circumstances, the Defendant recognized all the crimes against the Defendant; (b) under unfavorable circumstances; (c) the Defendant obtained approximately KRW 32.6 million from the seven victims; and (d) the Defendant, who had not been suffering from misunderstanding after the long-term prison life, was the mother of the victim C, thereby taking advantage of the victim C and D couple’s fluencing power; (b) there is a high possibility of criticism and criticism of the nature of the crime by deceiving approximately KRW 277,45,00,00 for a long time; (c) the considerable amount of the defrauded money was used for purchasing high-priced stolen stolen goods; (d) one punishment for the same type of fraud; and (d) there was a history of punishment once for suspension of execution three times; and (e) there was a repeated crime that was committed against many victims by means similar to fraud; and (d) the Defendant was punished by imprisonment for a similar crime against multiple victims.

In general, the sentencing of the lower court seems to have been appropriately determined by fully considering these points, and it is difficult to find out other special circumstances to change the sentence of the lower court.

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

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.