A. The sentence of the lower court (ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court (ten months of imprisonment) is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. The facts charged are recognized and reflected by the Defendant when it comes to the trial, most of the investment funds received from the victim are appropriated for the business expenses of other companies operated by the Defendant, and the Defendant does not appear to have been returned individually, and the fact that the Defendant does not have the same power, and that there is no criminal punishment except for the past 17 years prior to and one case before the 17 years prior to the fine, is favorable to the Defendant.

However, the Defendant received investment funds and provided a basic plan document by creating a electric source house and farm site on the land AJ, AK, and AL adjacent to the Defendant. However, the Defendant actually received investment funds from the Defendant, but did not use them entirely in carrying out the said real estate development project (the Defendant submitted a real estate sales contract as of December 14, 2016 to the effect that the Defendant actually carried out the said real estate development project at the lower court, but the land subject to sale and purchase under the said contract is a place with approximately 2km away from the original victim’s project site and approximately 10km away from the original project site, and the development area cannot be deemed as the same business as 10% compared to the original project site). Although the Defendant had been carrying out various projects around the time when the Defendant received investment funds from the victim, there was no apparent business performance, but there was no significant possibility that the NN sale business operator would have suffered any loss from the investment proceeds and the return of investment proceeds by himself/herself.

Each of the above circumstances.