The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The defendant shall pay 140,000 won to AE which is an application for compensation.

3.2

1. The sentence imposed by the court below (one year and two 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, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). There is no new circumstance to change the sentence of the lower court in the trial. Considering that the reasons for sentencing as stated by the lower court are the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, records of the crime, motive or circumstance of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, the sentence imposed by the lower court was conducted within the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. According to the records of judgment as to the application for compensation, since the defendant can recognize the fact that he acquired 140,000 won from the applicant for compensation, the defendant has the obligation to pay the above money by deceit to the applicant for compensation.

[On the other hand, the applicant for compensation sought payment of KRW 143,00 (i.e., 140,000 obtained by deception under the name of goods price) but according to Article 25(1)1 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, a criminal court may order only the direct physical damage, etc. caused by the fraudulent act that is found guilty. However, the prosecutor prosecuted only the above 140,000 won fraud crime, and only the judgment of the court below is found guilty, and thus the part of the claim exceeding the above 140,000 won out of the application for compensation by the applicant for compensation is rejected).

4. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit, and the application for compensation by the applicant for compensation is with merit. Thus, the defendant is subject to Articles 25 (1) and 31 (1) and (2) of the Act on Special Cases Concern