2. The judgment defendant led to the confession of the crime, and agreed with the victim.

In the instant crime, the punishment should be determined in consideration of equity in cases where the crime of this case is concurrent crimes between the crime of fraud for which the judgment (in Incheon District Court 2013 High Court 2013 High Court 8573) has become final and the latter part of Article 37

However, the damage amount of this case exceeds 230 million won, and the case is hot.

Moreover, the instant crime was committed by the Defendant to the Incheon District Court 2013 High Court 2013 Highest8573 case and is likely to be subject to criticism against the Defendant.

The court below, taking into account the circumstances favorable to the defendant, has determined the punishment for the defendant, and there is no particular change in circumstances to consider the sentencing after the decision of the court below.

In addition, considering the various circumstances that are conditions for sentencing, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime is committed, it is not recognized that the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable.

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that the defendant's appeal is groundless. It is so decided as per

(However, since it is apparent that the "victim D" in Part 3 of the judgment of the court below is the error of "victim E", it shall be corrected ex officio in accordance with Article 25 (1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure.