The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. In light of the summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of this case’s sentencing conditions, the sentence imposed by the court below against the defendant (one year and six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, two years of social service, 240 hours) is too unreasonable.

2. In full view of the following facts: (a) under favorable circumstances, there was no history of punishment for the same kind of crime; (b) part of the money acquired through deception was returned to the victims under the name of return of principal or allowances; and (c) the Defendant appears to have led to the instant crime in light of the structure of raising investment funds, operating methods, profit structure, the Defendant’s status and role; (d) there was no agreement with the victims or no measures for recovery from damage; and (e) there was an attitude to transfer his criminal liability to Q, the representative of DB, who is an employee, to whom he is an employee, etc., the lower court sentenced the same punishment as stated in the above 1.

In full view of the above circumstances and other arguments and records, the lower court’s sentencing appears to have been appropriately determined by fully considering the various reasons for sentencing alleged by the Defendant. Although an agreement with the victim M was reached in the first instance trial, it is difficult to view that the above punishment was changed to the extent that it was changed.

In the end, the defendant's argument of sentencing is not acceptable.

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