The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

The court below and the parties applying for compensation.

1. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (one year and two months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The judgment of the court below is an unfavorable circumstance where each of the crimes of this case committed the crime of this case is not good in light of the type of crime, amount of damage, etc. by borrowing money with intent not to repay the money, thereby obtaining money from the injured party by borrowing money from the injured party, without paying the money for the guidance of the fraternity in which the defendant is the guidance of the fraternity in which he is the guidance. The victim did not agree with the victim I and K, and the victims want to be punished by the defendant.

However, in light of the fact that the defendant is led to each of the crimes of this case, the first offender, and the defendant agreed with the victim D, F, and C, and the victim I and K deposited KRW 5 million each for the victim I and K, and other various circumstances that form the conditions for sentencing as shown in the records and theories of this case, such as the defendant's age, sexual conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the court below is somewhat unreasonable, and the above argument by the defendant is reasonable.

3. Determination on the application for compensation

A. As to the application for compensation filed by the applicant C for compensation (2016 early 1595) of the lower court, the lower court rendered a compensation order to the Defendant C to pay the Defendant the amount calculated by the rate of 5% per annum from the day following the delivery of the compensation order to the day of full payment. However, according to the record, the Defendant and the applicant C agreed that the Defendant and the compensation applicant C reached the first instance judgment, the scope of the compensation liability becomes unclear.

Therefore, since the application for compensation filed by the applicant C for compensation in the court below should be dismissed, the part of the order for compensation in the court below cannot be maintained any longer.

B. As to the application for compensation filed by F, the applicant F for the compensation filed by F (the early 2016 3193) F is the applicant F.