All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. As to the punishment for three-year imprisonment sentenced in the original trial on the summary of the grounds for appeal, the defendant asserts that it is too unreasonable for the defendant, and the prosecutor asserts that it is too unfeasible and unfair.

2. We also examine the judgment and prosecutor’s improper claims for sentencing.

The Defendant was sentenced to four times due to the crime of fraud and embezzlement, and was sentenced to imprisonment for a repeated crime in violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective deadly weapon, etc.) in 2012. However, the Defendant committed the crime of this case, such as fraud and embezzlement, and the Defendant used actively deception method, multiple victims repeating the crime, the Defendant’s total amount of damages equivalent to KRW 280 million to five victims due to the crime of fraud, the total amount of damages equivalent to KRW 160 million to two victims due to embezzlement, and the total amount of damages was KRW 440 million,00,000,000,000 won, and most damages have not yet been recovered until the crime was committed, and the amount of damages, such as the collection of beauty rooms operated by the Defendant AC living together before towing, was less than 15 million won, and 300,000,000,000 won were less than 40,000 alcohol content of this case.

It can not be seen, and it is clear that there is a need to sentence a severe punishment corresponding to the defendant.

However, the defendant has taken an attitude of recognizing and opposing the defendant's wrong, and the 2nd cost of the vehicle equivalent to 5 million won in total among the five damaged vehicles in the crime of embezzlement against the victim N was returned to the victim's side, and the amount equivalent to 22 million won in total was returned to the victim's damage amount to the crime of fraud against the victim R, and the amount equivalent to 22 million won in total was returned to the victim.