2. The circumstances favorable to the Defendant are recognized, such as the confession of the instant crime and the Defendant’s confession of the instant crime, and the fact that the Defendant was the first offender with no record of criminal punishment in the Republic of Korea.

However, the crime of this case is deemed to have committed the crime of this case by deceiving the victims in collusion with the victim in the name of the victim, and in light of the content and amount of the crime, the liability for the crime of this case is grave, especially the fact that the crime of this case is committed in a systematic and planned manner, the defendant does not make any effort to recover the victims' damage, and in our Criminal Procedure Act taking the trial-oriented principle and the principle of direct supervision, it is reasonable to respect the sentencing in cases where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court and the first instance court, and the first instance court sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015), and the circumstances favorable to the above recognized defendant do not fall under any special change in circumstances that could change the sentence of the court below after the pronouncement of the judgment of the court below, and it does not seem to be too unreasonable to take into account all the circumstances of the defendant's argument in this case, including the defendant's age, environment, and circumstances.

3. As such, the Defendant’s appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition. However, according to Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, “a summary of evidence” of the lower judgment is corrected as adding “1. Defendant’s oral statement” to “a summary of evidence” column.