The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

However, the period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor (ten months of imprisonment) is too unhued and unfair.

B. The above sentence sentenced by the court below is too unreasonable.

2. Regarding the judgment and the defendant's argument of unfair sentencing, the sum of the amount acquired through deceit of this case exceeds 61 million won, and the sum of accrued wages exceeds 36,940,000 won, which is disadvantageous to the defendant. However, under Article 109 (2) of the Labor Standards Act, the defendant's previous conviction due to a crime of fraud, and criminal records of identical punishment due to a crime of violation of the Labor Standards Act are disadvantageous to the defendant, on the other hand, recognized each of the facts charged in this case and reflects his mistake. The defendant agreed with the victim D at the court of the trial, and agreed with the victim D at the court of the trial, and the fact that the defendant was deemed to have fully repaid the unpaid wages to the damaged workers is an offense falling under Articles 109 (1) and 43 (1) of the Labor Standards Act, which cannot be prosecuted against the victim's intent expressed in the judgment of the court of first instance before the victim's declaration of intent or withdrawal of punishment.

Therefore, the unpaid wage for the victimized workers was repaid before the judgment of the court below rendered.

Even if the injured worker did not want the defendant's punishment, the court below did not render a judgment dismissing the public prosecution against this part and found the injured worker guilty.

The intention of each crime of fraud does not seem to be conclusive, and there are some circumstances to consider the background leading to each crime of fraud, and the defendant is bound by this case.