The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the above punishment for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the reasons for appeal (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The instant crime was committed by the Defendant by forging a document in the name of his own person (e.g., this paper D, HabH) and by deceiving a lending company as if he was the person, and by deceiving the lending company, and by deceiving the lending company, and the method of crime is considerably poor and the nature of the crime is very heavy.

It is not small in the scale of damage, such as that the damaged loan company reaches four places and the amount of defraudation reaches a total of 51 million won.

However, while committing the instant crime, the Defendant was able to repent his mistake in depth through a life close to three months of detention.

In the judgment of the court below, the defendant fully repaid the amount of defraudation to the victim Love Loan Co., Ltd., the NH Social Co., Ltd., and the NH Capital, and recovered the damage, and the defendant partially recovered the damage by repaying the amount of KRW 10 million,00,000,000,000 for the victimsan and the loan Co., Ltd.

The defendant Love Loan Co., Ltd. and NH Capital expressed in the original trial that the defendant was not punished in the first instance trial.

At the original trial, H expressed its intention that it is not punishable by the defendant in the first instance trial.

The Defendant is an initial offender who has no criminal history.

At this time, the father of the defendant is currently being confined in prison and in the detention house, which is omitted.

In full view of the changes in circumstances, such as the recovery of damage and the expression of intention not to punish in the above circumstances and the above, as well as all other conditions of sentencing as shown in the argument of the instant case, including the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive and circumstances leading to the instant crime, and the situation before and after the instant crime, the punishment sentenced by the lower court is unreasonable.

Defendant’s assertion is with merit.

3. Thus, the defendant's appeal is reasonable, and Article 364 of the Criminal Procedure Act is applicable.