The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below (the imprisonment of eight months, the suspension of the execution of two years, the collection of penalty) is too unreasonable.

2. Under our criminal litigation law, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the direct principle, it is reasonable to respect the determination of sentencing in cases where there exists no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and where the first instance court’s sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion (Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). The defendant shows an attitude to recognize and reflect each of the crimes in this case, and the defendant is the first offender, but the court below seems to have determined the sentence against the defendant, and there is no change in circumstances to consider the sentencing after the pronouncement of the judgment below, and the amount of support the defendant received by false means is relatively low, the court below does not seem to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, comprehensively taking account of the defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive and background of each of the crimes in this case, method and method of each of the crimes in this case, and circumstances after the crime.

[On the other hand, the Defendant asserts that the amount of collection is excessive and unfair, but Article 33(3) of the North Korean Refugees Act, which provides that the Constitutional Court shall not violate the Constitution, in a judgment on the unconstitutionality of a law, upon the recommendation of a judgment on the unconstitutionality of a law by this court, where the Defendant obtained property or financial benefits by receiving the protection or support under the North Korean Residents Act by fraud or other improper means (hereinafter “North Korean Residents Act”).

Since "The Constitutional Court 2015Hun-Ga decided August 31, 2017" (the Constitutional Court 2015Hun-Ga decided August 21, 201), this part of the defendant's assertion is also accepted.