The judgment below

Part 1 of the judgment is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two months.

except that this judgment.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (an offence No. 1 in the original judgment: Imprisonment with prison labor for 2 months, and a crime No. 2, 3, and 4 in the original judgment: Imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months) that the court below rendered is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The fact that the Defendant again commits this part of the crime despite the fact that the Defendant had been subject to two times a sentence of fraud and two times a fine prior to the crime under this part of the judgment below regarding the allegation of unfair sentencing as to the crime No. 1 of the judgment below, is disadvantageous to

However, the fact that the defendant appears to recognize and reflect this part of the crime, and that the above victim does not want the punishment of the defendant by making repayment of KRW 15 million to the victim B in the trial, and that the above victim does not want the punishment of the defendant. This part of the crime is the circumstances favorable to the defendant, such as the facts stated in the judgment of the court below, in relation to the crime of violation of the Act on the Regulation of Fraud and the Act on the Regulation of Similar Receiving Act and the concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 3

In addition, in full view of the following factors: Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and background of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., various sentencing conditions as indicated in the instant records and pleadings, the sentence imposed on Defendant 1 as indicated by the lower court is too unreasonable.

B. The circumstances favorable to the Defendant are the following: (a) the Defendant appears to recognize and oppose each of the instant crimes; and (b) the Defendant agreed to pay 4.8 million won to the victim G in the trial; and (c) the fact that the Defendant agreed to pay 4.8 million won to the victim G in the trial.

However, despite the fact that the defendant has been punished several times as a crime of fraud, and even though he had the record of punishment for the suspension of the execution of imprisonment once due to the violation of the Act on the Regulation of Conducting Fund-Raising Business without Permission, data to confirm that the defendant committed each part of the crime without being involved in the repeated crime due to fraud, and that the damage to the victim E was actually recovered until the judgment of the court.