The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal (one year and eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the judgment of the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). It is recognized that the period for which the instant crime was committed remains approximately four months, and that there is no profit gained by the Defendant compared to the amount of damage, and that there is no criminal record other than punishment imposed once by a fine for a crime of finite.

However, the crimes of Bosing are crimes of acquiring money from many unspecified persons who are in the economic difficulties by sharing their roles systematically, systematically and artificially, and they are crimes of receiving money from them through loans, etc., which are a large number of victims, not being recovered from damage, and there is a need to punish them with severe social harm, such as damaging trust in state agencies, financial institutions, etc.

The Defendant voluntarily left Korea and joined the Bosing Criminal Organization, and acquired approximately KRW 300 million while working as a counselor. Each assistance staff member of Bosing Criminal committed an essential act for the commission of all crimes regardless of the seriousness of the role performed by them. As such, the Defendant cannot be deemed to be less liable solely on the ground that the role assigned to Bosing Criminal is relatively small and gains.

In addition, taking into account all the factors of sentencing as shown in the records and arguments, such as the defendant's age, occupation, family relationship, and the balance of punishment with other accomplices, the sentence imposed by the court below against the defendant is not heavy.

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

Article 25 of the Regulations on Criminal Procedure.