2. Determination is recognized that the Defendant acquired the civil title of execution for the recovery of the defrauded money, etc., by reason of the fact that the Defendant’s health is not good due to the cerebral transfusion and that the victim acquired the civil title against the Defendant.

However, the defendant again commits the crime of this case during the period of repeated crime due to the same crime, and it is not good to regard it as a crime of fraud by conclusive criminal intent.

Despite the amount of fraud, the defendant did not agree with the victim so that he/she would be subject to the trial, and he/she did not fully recover from damage.

In full view of the above circumstances and the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive, background, means and consequence of the crime, etc., various sentencing conditions as shown in the instant pleadings, including the circumstances after the crime was committed, and the scope of recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines set by the Supreme Court sentencing committee, the lower court’s sentence cannot be deemed to be too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion 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 ground that it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.