The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the sentence No. 1-A. 2(b) of the lower court’s sentence (the sentence No. 1-A. 2(b)) is too unreasonable.

2. Although the circumstances favorable to the defendant are recognized, such as the fact that the defendant recognized the crime of this case as well as the fact that the defendant committed the crime of this case at Gap's request, the circumstances leading up to the crime of this case, which may be taken into account, the agreement with the victim, and the balance with the case where a judgment is rendered simultaneously with the criminal records having concurrent relation with the victim under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, in some cases, the crime of this case is recognized. However, after sharing the roles of the defendant and his accomplice, the crime of this case is committed by forging private documents and using them to obtain money and valuables from the victim in a planned manner, and the nature of the crime is very poor, the defendant has the history of punishment for the crime of this case at least several times during the suspension period, and the defendant committed the crime of this case during the suspension of execution period, and other various circumstances that form the conditions for sentencing in this case, the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, family relations, etc.,

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

[However, Article 34(1) of the Criminal Act is clear that the “Article 34(1) of the Criminal Act” of the 7th, 5, 8, and 11 of the judgment of the court below is a clerical error in the “Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act,” and such correction shall be made ex officio in accordance with