2. The judgment that the defendant recognized all of the crimes of this case and reflected against the defendant is favorable to the defendant.

However, the crime of Bosing consists of organized crimes, causing serious damage to many victims, and making it difficult to recover damage difficult, so severe punishment is required, and the amount of damage reaches about KRW 17 million, and no recovery of damage was made, and there was no agreement with the victims, and there was a large number of the number of means of access (the physical card No. 14) kept by the accused.

In full view of the above normal relationship and the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and circumstances leading to the instant crime, and circumstances before and after the instant crime, etc., the judgment of the lower court’s sentencing cannot be deemed to have exceeded the reasonable bounds of discretion.

In addition, it is reasonable to respect the sentencing of the first instance court in cases where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). There is no change in circumstances that it is unreasonable to maintain the sentencing of the lower court in the

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is not accepted.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, since the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.