The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Reasons for appeal;

A. In fact, the Defendant did not defraud the victim Y of KRW 20,000,00 on January 27, 2014, and KRW 3,000,000 on February 19, 204.

B. In relation to the misunderstanding of legal doctrine 2015 Highest 2754 case, the court’s arbitrary aggravation of repeated offense even though the prosecutor did not prosecute as a repeated offense is erroneous.

(c)

The punishment of the court below is heavy.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and duly admitted by the lower court on the assertion of misunderstanding of the facts, the fact that the Defendant, who did not have been delegated to sell and purchase, deceiving the victim as if he was delegated to sell and purchase, thereby deceiving the victim of KRW 23,00,000.

B. Even if a prosecutor who made a judgment of misapprehension of the legal doctrine omitted the provision applicable to the aggravation of repeated crimes in the indictment while instituting the Defendant, the court may ex officio punish the Defendant as a repeated offender by applying the provision (see Supreme Court Decision 2006Do3194, Jul. 27, 2006, etc.).

There is no significant change in circumstances after the judgment of the court below regarding the unfair argument of sentencing.

In light of the records of this case and the reasons for sentencing on the judgment of the court below, considering all the circumstances asserted by the defendant on the grounds of appeal, the sentence of the court below is heavy.

shall not be effective.3.

In conclusion, the defendant's appeal cannot be accepted.