A. The sentence of imprisonment by the first instance court (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

(b)the sentence of the first instance court for the inspection is too uneasible and unreasonable;

2. In the crime of this case, the crime of this case was committed on the stock investment by the defendant, but the amount of KRW 600 million was invested on the overseas auction site called Dold, and even if it was fully damaged by the victims, the crime of this case was committed by deceiving the victims despite the lack of ability to repay the investment money from the victims, and the crime is not very good. The victim F borrowed money from a third party for the purpose of investing in the defendant, and was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for one year (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2014Da426, Jul. 10, 2014). The rest victims appeal damages, such as home wave, etc. in addition to the economic losses of the defendant caused by the crime of this case, and the defendant fails to provide specific measures to recover damages to the victims up to the present day after the crime of this case.

However, even though the defendant was believed, the intent of the victims who want to obtain high profits in a short period seems to have affected the occurrence of damage or the expansion of damage, there is no record of criminal punishment, the defendant is divided into and against his mistake, and many investors who have not been paid money after lending money to the defendant like the victims of this case want not to have the punishment against the defendant but have the prior position. In addition, various sentencing conditions and the first sentence sentence shown in the arguments of this case, such as the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., are in the sentencing guidelines.