The judgment of the court below is reversed.

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

However, the period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

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

2. The crime of this case is an unfavorable circumstance to the Defendant, such as the following: (a) the Defendant forged the certificate of loan under the name of another person and acquired money by deceiving the victims by using it; (b) the quality of the crime is bad; and (c) the amount of damage is up to 44.7 million won; and (d) the Defendant again committed the crime of this case even if suspended execution due to the commission of the crime such as fraud, fabrication of private documents, and the use of the above investigation documents, etc.

On the other hand, the Defendant appears to have been aware of his mistake and against himself; the equity in the case of a judgment at the same time with a final judgment on May 28, 2014, which became final and conclusive; the Defendant repaid the victim KRW 6,119,00 from the time of the instant crime to February 14, 2017; the Defendant repaid the victim KRW 35,00,000 to February 14, 2017; and the Defendant repaid most of the amount of damages, such as paying the victim KRW 6,119,000,000 to the time of agreement on February 14, 2017; and the Defendant repaid KRW 35,00,000 to KRW 3,581,00,000 to KRW 3,444,70,000,000 to KRW 6,19,000,005,000 to KRW 35,005,00).

However, it is difficult to recognize that the full amount of damage has been repaid because the data submitted by the defendant alone is insufficient to recognize the fact of repayment of KRW 3,581,00.

The fact that the injured party is unable to punish the accused in agreement with the injured party when the injured party was in the first instance, and that it seems that the injured party supports the children who were living alone after the divorce, is favorable to the accused.

In full view of the above circumstances and the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, circumstances leading to the commission of the crime, and various sentencing conditions as shown in the records and arguments, the lower court’s punishment is unreasonable.

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