2. The judgment that the defendant recognized the crime of this case, and that the defendant paid the victim E, AA, B, Y, Z, Z, and 2020 order group54 cases in the judgment of the court below (the total amount of damage 1,485,00 won, total amount of repayment 1,940,000 won) to the victim K as stated in the judgment of the court below, and that the above victims did not punish the defendant is more favorable.

On the other hand, there are several criminal records, including the Defendant’s punishment, and the Defendant committed the instant crime during the period of repeated crime due to criminal records of the same veterinary act as the instant crime, and the victim is a total of 30 persons, a total of 30 persons, a total of 9,130,000 won, and a total of 9,130,000 won has not been recovered from halogen damage to the victims other than the victims mentioned above.

There is no special relationship or change of circumstances that can be newly considered by this court, and in full view of the defendant's age, character and conduct, family relationship, circumstances after the crime, and various sentencing conditions as shown in the records and arguments of this case, the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable.

Defendant’s assertion is not accepted.

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