The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below (the crime of paragraphs 1 through 6 at the time of sale: imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months, 7, and 8: fine for 3 million won) is too unreasonable in light of all the circumstances, including the fact that the defendant is against the defendant, and that he agreed with the victim of larceny, etc.

2. It is recognized that the judgment of the defendant shows the appearance against the defendant, and that the defendant paid damages to two larceny victims and agreed to do so.

However, the crime of this case is committed by deceiving or threatening D to receive the victims' resident registration certificates, etc. by deceiving or threatening D, using DNA's personal information, and presenting the victims' resident registration certificates as if they were entrusted to D, or by forging and submitting a mobile phone subscription application, etc. under D's name, by deceiving victims through deceiving them on six occasions, by deceiving them, and by deceiving them through using high-priced cell phones, loans, and so on as to be a convenience store, and by taking the victims with goods with convenience points at convenience points, each theft of victims' property over two times. It is not good that the crime is committed by forging private documents or using another's resident registration certificates illegally and deceiving victims by deceiving them. In the case of crimes of subparagraphs 1 through 6 of the judgment, the defendant did not pay damages to the victims even if there is a large number of victims of fraud, and the defendant argued that there was no substantial benefit in the criminal act of this case, but it is hard to accept that there was no substantial benefit in the criminal act of this case by using P's intimidation.