2. The circumstances favorable to the defendant are acknowledged, such as the fact that the defendant made a confession of the crime of this case and reflects the mistake, that the defendant is responsible for the livelihood of both his wife and her two children, that the family's living is difficult due to the detention of the defendant, that the defendant's family and her branch want to have a preference against the defendant, and that there is no criminal history beyond the fine, etc.

However, the crime of this case is committed by deceiving victims even though the defendant did not have the intent or ability to pay transportation expenses, by deceiving them total of 32,350,000 won through 67 times in total, without permission of the Minister of Construction and Transportation of the Republic of Korea. In light of the content of the crime and the amount of fraud, the responsibility of the crime is heavy, in light of the crime and the amount of fraud, the defendant does not make any effort to pay damages to the victims up to the present, in our criminal litigation law, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the principle of directness, there are areas unique to the first deliberation, and there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first trial and the first trial sentencing does not go beyond the reasonable scope of discretion (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The circumstances favorable to the defendant prior to the judgment of the court below do not seem to fall under any special change in circumstances that could change the sentence of the court below after the sentence of the court below, and the defendant's age and circumstances in this case.

3. Thus, the defendant's appeal is without merit.