The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the court below (ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The circumstances favorable to the defendant include: (a) the fact that the defendant fully recognizes the crime; (b) the amount of fraud by each of the crimes in this case is not relatively large; and (c) the fact that the victim D does not want punishment for the defendant by receiving the defrauded

However, the defendant has the same criminal records of criminal punishment over a total of 15 times (one time of imprisonment, one time of suspended sentence), and 11 times of a fine). Among them, a majority of the crimes committed in the same type as this case and criminal punishment for the same obstruction of business can have the same history as this case. In particular, even though the defendant was sentenced to three months of imprisonment with prison labor on July 23, 2014 and released on August 27, 2014, the defendant seems not to have repeatedly committed the instant crime and repeatedly committed the instant crime, and thus, it seems that the possibility of repeating the crime is high, and that there is no agreement or no recovery from damage with the victims other than the victim D, etc. are disadvantageous to the defendant.

In addition, considering the age, character and conduct, the environment, the circumstances after the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, various sentencing conditions as shown in the pleadings, the sentence of the court below cannot be deemed unfair because it is too unreasonable.

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