The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence of the original court (six months of imprisonment) shall be too vague and unfair.

2. Determination

A. According to the records, the court below determined punishment within the scope of recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines established by the Supreme Court Sentencing Committee, taking into account the following factors: (a) the number of crimes and the money obtained by deception is considerably high; (b) the damage is not recovered; (c) the records of punishment for the same kind of crime are several times; (d) the errors are divided and reflected; and (e) the family environment are reflected.

B. Although there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the original judgment as the new sentencing materials have not been submitted in the trial court, and considering the various reasons revealed in the oral proceedings, the lower court’s sentencing is too inappropriate and it does not seem to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

C. Therefore, the argument of unfair sentencing is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.

(However, the judgment of the court below is clearly stated that the term "eight months of imprisonment" in the third page 14 is a clerical error of "six months of imprisonment," and thus, it shall be corrected ex officio pursuant to Article 25 of the Rules on Criminal Procedure.