The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the reasons for appeal - the court below’s punishment (two months of imprisonment) is too heavy.

2. Determination

A. There is no change in circumstances in the trial about sentencing.

In addition to the fact that the defendant recognized all criminal facts by violating the Labor Standards Act that he denied by the court below, there is no change in the reason for sentencing.

B. The lower court already determined the sentence by fully taking account of all the circumstances that the Defendant asserted on the grounds of unfair appeal for sentencing.

The court below has already asserted that the defendant suffered damages rather than the damage to sell the real estate in the name of the spouse for the agreement, and the court below has fully considered various circumstances including the above points.

(c)

The punishment of the court below shall not be remarkably unfair.

When comprehensively taking into account all the circumstances after the commission of the instant crime, including the content, motive and background, amount of damage, whether damage has been recovered, the criminal record, age and character, etc., the detention period, investigation and trial process due to the instant crime, and the legal treatment of single concurrent crimes after Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the lower court’s punishment is within the reasonable scope of sentencing.

I seem to appear.

Therefore, the defendant's argument of sentencing is not accepted.

3. As such, the Defendant’s appeal is without merit and is dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. Since it is apparent that the part of the defraudation of KRW 12,00,000, which was September 24, 2015, among the crime sight table attached to the lower judgment, was omitted by mistake, the Defendant’s appeal is to be corrected as the crime sight table attached to this judgment ex officio in accordance with Article 25 of the Rules on Criminal Procedure. It is so decided as per Disposition.