The judgment below

The part of the judgment No. 1 of the crime is reversed.

As to the crime No. 1 of the judgment of the defendant, six months of imprisonment.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (one year of imprisonment with prison labor for crimes No. 1 in the judgment of the court below, four months of imprisonment with prison labor for crimes No. 2 in the judgment of the court below, and two years of suspended execution) which the court below sentenced to the defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the crime No. 1 of the decision of the court below, the crime of deceiving the victim in personal trust relationship by deceiving about about 5 years and 4 months is not good.

The defendant has three criminal records of the same kind of crime, including criminal records of the suspension of execution of imprisonment for the same crime.

However, when the defendant was in the first instance, the defendant led to the confession of this part of the crime, and there was an agreement with the victim.

The health condition of the defendant is also not good.

In full view of the above circumstances and the defendant's age, sexual conduct, environment, family relationship, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, and the scope of the recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines set by the Supreme Court's sentencing committee (one hundred to two years) [the scope of the recommended punishment] types 2 (one hundred million won or more, five hundred million won or less), the mitigated area (one hundred to two years and six months) [the person subject to special mitigation] mitigated area (one hundred and half years) of the mitigated punishment (one hundred and half years), etc., the sentence imposed by the court below against the defendant is somewhat unreasonable.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is justified.

B. It is recognized that there is a need to consider equity with the case where the defendant received judgment at the same time as the crime recorded in the records of crime No. 2 of the original judgment, which is one of the concurrent crimes after Article 37 of the Criminal Act, as to the crime No. 2 of the original judgment as to the crime in the second instance judgment.

However, it is not good that the defendant obtains money in the name of fees for the removal service contract by deceiving the victim, and it is not good to commit such crime.

The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for the same crime, and three times.