2. The circumstances favorable to the defendant include the fact that the defendant's mistake is recognized and reflected, the scale of individual damage is relatively small, and the fact that most victims deposited the amount of damage.

However, the crime of this case was committed by deceiving money to many victims for a considerable period of time by abusing the characteristics of Internet transactions in which it is relatively easy for the defendant to acquire money for the small amount of money, and the nature of the crime is heavy in light of the contents, circumstances, methods, period and frequency of the crime.

Furthermore, the defendant has been punished several times for the same crime, and there is no agreement with the victims during the suspended execution period for the same crime, and it is inevitable to punish a considerable period of time in that it still did not reach an agreement with the victims.

In addition to these circumstances, considering the various conditions of sentencing as shown in the records and arguments including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, and circumstances after crimes, and the scope of recommended sentences according to the sentencing guidelines of the Supreme Court Sentencing Committee (one to one year and six months), it cannot be deemed that the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

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