The judgment below

The remainder, excluding the rejection of an application for compensation order, shall be reversed.

The defendant shall be sentenced to one year of imprisonment.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (two years of imprisonment) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. The so-called “wishing” crime, such as the instant crime, is committed in a systematic, planned, and intelligent manner, and is highly likely to cause social harm, and even if part of the crime is involved because it is difficult to arrest the entire organization, a strict punishment is required.

The amount of defraudation caused by the instant crime is approximately KRW 2,30,000,000, and the victims still did not recover from the damage.

This is disadvantageous to the defendant.

However, when the defendant was in a trial, he recognized the crime of this case and is against the law, and the defendant took part in the crime of this case as the so-called "passing liability" and the degree of his participation is relatively excessive.

When the defendant was in the trial, the defendant agreed with some victims (the total amount of damage is about KRW 90,000,000), and there is no significant criminal record in relation to this case.

This is the circumstances favorable to the defendant.

In the case of fraud for which the sentencing guidelines for the establishment of the sentencing guidelines set by the Sentencing Committee are set, the basic area of organized fraud (special mitigation factors: simple sentencing factors, special aggravation factors: crime for unspecified or large number of victims or repeated crimes over a considerable period) is set out in Type 2 (special mitigation factors: simple sentencing factors: special aggravation factors: crime for unspecified or large number of victims) and 1/3 of the lower limit (two years of imprisonment) is reduced from 1 year to 5 years;

In full view of the various circumstances, including the defendant's age, environment, character and conduct, motive of the crime, and circumstances before and after the crime, etc., the sentence of the court below is somewhat inappropriate.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reasonable in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act.