2. In light of the judgment, there are favorable circumstances such as: (a) the Defendant’s perception of the instant crime and reflects the Defendant’s mistake; (b) the Defendant, who actually acquired the so-called “collection” role compared to the amount of defraudation by the instant crime; and (c) the Defendant appears not to have much profits; and (d) the Defendant did not have any criminal record other than three times due to the crime of violation of the Establishment of Local Reserve Forces Act

However, the crime of Bosing is a systematic intelligent crime that is closely committed against many and unspecified persons, and its social harm is very poor, and the damage from such crime is spreading considerably, and it has structural characteristics that are not easy to recover from damage. Therefore, it is necessary to strictly punish the crime of this case. Furthermore, the degree of the defendant's participation in the crime of this case, such as paying money from victims by using false documents in the name of the Chairperson of the Financial Services Commission.

In full view of the following facts: (a) the extent of the amount of fraud through the instant crime is not so much; (b) the victims’ damage has not been recovered; (c) the equity with the punishment of the same and similar cases should be taken into account; and (d) the Defendant’s age, sex, intelligence and environment; (b) the motive, means and consequence of the instant crime; and (c) the various conditions of sentencing as shown in the records and arguments, such as the circumstances after the crime, are adequate; and (d) the above assertion by the Defendant 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 grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.