Each order for compensation against D, E, L, M, and S, which is an applicant for compensation by the lower court.

Defendant

The sentence of the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment, and confiscation) is too unreasonable.

The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

Judgment

Based on the statutory penalty, the sentencing is a discretionary judgment that takes into account the conditions of the sentencing prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act within a reasonable and appropriate range.

However, considering the unique area of sentencing of the first instance court that is respected under the principle of trial priority and the principle of directness taken by our Criminal Procedure Act and the nature of the ex post facto review of the appellate court, it is reasonable to reverse the unfair judgment of the first instance court only in cases where it is deemed that the judgment of the first instance court exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion when comprehensively considering the conditions of sentencing in the course of the first instance sentencing review and the sentencing criteria, etc., or where it is deemed unfair to maintain the first instance sentencing as it is in full view of the materials newly discovered in the course of the appellate court’s sentencing review.

In the absence of such exceptional circumstances, it is desirable to respect the sentencing of the first instance court in the absence of such exceptional circumstances.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015, etc.). It is recognized that the Defendant paid additional payments to some victims (M, E, D, L, S, AG, I,H, AB, and AJ) following the lower judgment.

However, the Defendant still failed to recover from the victims (B, R, etc.) whose amount of damage was high.

In addition, as the court below held, even though the defendant was already punished several times for the same kind of crime, the defendant committed each of the crimes of this case again on 15 days after he was released from the same department, and in light of the frequency, method and result of each of the crimes of this case, the nature and the crime of this case are very heavy.

Therefore, the circumstances alleged by the defendant and the prosecutor as an element of sentencing, including the circumstances of partial repayment in the trial.