The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence of the lower court (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

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

2. We also examine the unfair sentencing cases between the accused and the prosecutor.

The Defendant’s each crime of this case is an unfavorable circumstance, where the victims had no intention or ability to pay the price in a normal way even after the completion of the construction work, they acquired property benefits by deceiving the victims as if they were to pay the price of construction work, and there are not sufficient criminal records that they did not pay the wages to workers, property gains acquired by deceit ( approximately KRW 55,850,00) and wages ( KRW 17,80,000) not paid, and there are four records that the Defendant was punished as a violation of the Labor Standards Act, and there are many records of punishment for these crimes.

However, in full view of all other circumstances, including the defendant's age, sex, environment, motive and background of the crime, means and method of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the court below is deemed unfair because it is too unreasonable, considering the following circumstances: (a) the defendant recognized each crime of this case in the trial at the time; (b) the victims and workers did not want the punishment against the defendant; (c) the victims and workers have been fully paid the overdue wages; (d) the full payment of the overdue wages was made; (e) the intention of conclusive fraud was not deemed to have committed each crime of this case with the intention to commit the crime of this case; and (e) the fact that there was no record of being sentenced to suspension of qualification or more severe punishment; and (e) the defendant's age, sexual behavior, environment, motive and circumstance

Therefore, the defendant's improper argument of sentencing is justified, and the prosecutor's improper argument of sentencing is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the defendant's appeal is justified.