The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The application for compensation order of this case shall be dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) by the lower court (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court’s judgment on the grounds for appeal, and the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In full view of the circumstances that the new sentencing data was not submitted in the first instance court, and there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the lower court’s judgment, and the circumstances in which the Defendant alleged for unfair reasons for sentencing are already reflected in the sentencing grounds of the lower court’s sentencing, the amount of damage caused by the instant crime is not more than 60,000 won, and the amount of damage is not more than 60,000 won, and is not recovered from the victims. Some of the instant crimes were lower during the period of repeated offense due to the same kind of crime, and are less than the period of repeated offense due to the same crime, the motive, means and consequence of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. The applicant filed an application for compensation order with the Defendant for the payment of KRW 32 million out of the amount obtained by deception 39.5 million against the Defendant at the trial court. However, the applicant recognized that the police was paid KRW 18.8 million from the injured party. In such a case, it is not reasonable to issue an order for compensation in the criminal trial due to such reasons as the scope of liability for compensation is unclear due to appropriation of expenses, interest, and principal.

4. As such, the Defendant’s appeal is without merit, and is dismissed pursuant to Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the application for remedy order by the applicant for compensation is not reasonable, and thus, the application for remedy order by the applicant for compensation is promoted.