The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the court below (one year of imprisonment) on the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.

2. The judgment of this case: (a) the Defendant committed the so-called “unclaimed food” crime committed on seven occasions by deceiving the owner of the main place of business by deceiving and taking the owner of the main place of business, etc.; and (b) the lower court determined a punishment by taking into account all favorable circumstances for the Defendant, such as the Defendant committed the instant crime, even though the Defendant had had been punished several times due to the same kind of crime, and had been sentenced to imprisonment for the same kind of crime, and the Defendant committed the instant crime repeatedly during the period of repeated crime; and (c) the Defendant led to the confession and reflect of the instant crime.

In the trial of the party, it is recognized that the defendant paid the amount of damages to five victims among the seven victims of this case after the decision of the court below was rendered.

However, even though the Defendant had much been punished for committing the fraud of a method similar to the instant case more than 10 times, the Defendant committed each of the instant crimes again, and the Defendant did not commit the so-called living type crime, strict punishment against the Defendant is required in that it does not constitute the so-called living type crime.

In addition, the Defendant’s partial repayment of damages ought to be made at least six months after the occurrence of each damage, which is basically a performance of civil liability.

In full view of the overall sentencing conditions, including the above circumstances, indicated in the record and change theory, the statutory penalty and applicable sentences of fraud, the scope of sentencing guidelines, etc., the judgment of the court below exceeded the reasonable bounds of discretion.

It does not seem that it does not appear.

Therefore, the defendant's double punishment cannot be accepted.

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