All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal asserts that the defendant's punishment (ten months of imprisonment) declared by the court below is too unreasonable, and the prosecutor asserts that the above punishment is too unfeasible and unfair.

2. We examine both the judgment and the prosecutor’s respective unfair claims for sentencing.

The so-called “scaming” fraud constitutes the most malicious type of fraud in terms of the method of deception, the characteristic of deception, the systematic and conclusive intention, and the fact that it is a systematic and secret criminal, among the criminal frauds that can be punished by imprisonment for up to 10 years ( statutory penalty).

In addition, the Defendant committed a crime repeatedly against a large number of victims, and most victims want to obtain a second financial right loan due to the lack of economic circumstances, and such victims may be subject to a large amount of gold and mental damage that may be caused by fraudulentation. Therefore, the degree of illegality of the instant crime committed by the Defendant is very high.

Therefore, considering the harm of these crimes, strict punishment is required for the defendant, even if the defendant is not in a leading position to plan the crime within the entire criminal organization, or considering that the defendant's profits from the crime are not high.

The lower court seems to have determined the sentence against the Defendant by taking account of the favorable circumstances, such as the need for strict punishment against the above Bosing fraud crime, and the fact that the Defendant committed all the crimes, and that the Defendant did not have any criminal record exceeding the same criminal record or fine, etc.

In comparison with the court below, there is no change in sentencing conditions, and the defendant has changed considering the fact that the family's health is not good.