A. The defendant has borrowed the name of the representative of Co-Defendant E at the request of Co-Defendant A of the court below, and there was no fact that he acquired money from the victims in collusion with A.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (fine 3.5 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the facts acknowledged by the court below in accordance with the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts, especially the status and role of the defendant and A, and the detailed method and process of the crime, it can be sufficiently recognized that the defendant committed each of the frauds in collusion with Co-Defendant A in the court below.

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

B. The instant crime committed by Co-Defendant A was led by Co-Defendant A of the lower court, the majority of victims did not want to punish the Defendant, and the Defendant does not have the same criminal power.

However, the court below seems to have determined the punishment in consideration of all favorable circumstances for the defendant, and there is no special change in circumstances to determine the punishment differently from the court below in the first instance.

In addition, in full view of the motive, means and result of the instant crime, the Defendants’ age, character and conduct, environment, health status, criminal records, and circumstances after the commission of the crime, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable as it is too unreasonable.

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

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is groundless.