The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The defendant pays 6,650,000 won to the applicant for compensation (the trial).

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) by the lower court (one year and two months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The Defendant recognized that all of the crimes were committed, and has a depth of the mistake.

The Defendant voluntarily surrendered to the investigative agency as the first offender who was aged.

Such circumstances are favorable to the defendant.

However, one of the instant crimes, such as the instant case, is systematically and systematically organized against many and unspecified persons, and is likely to cause serious damage to a large number of victims, and it is necessary to strictly punish them as not only is it easy to recover damage.

The Defendant’s act of carrying out the role of delivering cash is important to the degree of participation in the crime, and the method of committing the crime is not good such as presenting false documents to the victims while serving as an employee of the Financial Supervisory Service.

Although the total amount of fraud was not so much, it was not agreed with the victims, and there was no particular damage recovery.

Such circumstances are disadvantageous to the defendant.

In addition, taking into account the following circumstances, such as the Defendant’s career, sex, environment, family relationship, motive and background of the offense, degree of benefit gained from the offense, circumstances after the offense, etc., and the fact that there is no special change in circumstances that may change the sentencing after the judgment of the court below, the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable.

3. When the defendant filed an appeal against the judgment of the court below regarding the part of the compensation order, the compensation order case is also transferred to the court below pursuant to Article 33 (1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, but there is no statement in the petition of appeal and the reason for appeal submitted by the defendant and his defense counsel about the part of the compensation order, and even if examined ex officio, it cannot find any reason to revoke or revise it. Thus, the judgment below