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, it is unfair that the court below’s four-month punishment of imprisonment with prison labor, which the court below decided against the defendant, is too unreasonable.

2. In full view of ① favorable circumstances, the lower court sentenced the Defendant to the same punishment as indicated in the above paragraph 1, taking into account the following: (i) the confession and rebuttal of the Defendant; (ii) the Defendant committed each of the crimes of this case without being aware of, and (iii) the Defendant was committed even though the Defendant was a repeated offender period for the same kind of crime; and (iv) the Defendant was not agreed with the victims, since the crime of this case and each of the crimes of this case are in a concurrent crime relationship after Article 37 of the Criminal Act was established in the judgment of the lower court.

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 sentencing grounds alleged by the Defendant, and it is difficult to view that it was a circumstance to change the above punishment, even though it was agreed upon by the first instance court to reimburse the defrauded E with the damage incurred by the defrauded E.

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.