The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The judgment below

Among them, the compensation order part against C and I is as follows.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (two years of imprisonment) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. The crime of this case was committed by the Defendant by deceiving a large number of unspecified victims as if he sold goods via the Internet, and the crime was committed by deceiving money as a price for goods, and the crime is very poor.

The defendant has been punished several times due to the crime of the same fraud, including four times of imprisonment with prison labor, and continuously committed the crime from the time when three months have not passed since the execution of imprisonment with prison labor due to the crime of the same fraud was completed.

Although the amount of damage caused by the instant crime exceeds KRW 19.5 million, most of the damage was not recovered.

The defendant used considerable part of the money acquired by the victims as gambling funds.

However, the defendant is against himself while committing a crime.

The Defendant returned part of the amount of damage to some victims.

In full view of the above circumstances and the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, all of the sentencing conditions and the scope of recommended sentences in the sentencing guidelines, including the circumstances after the crime, it cannot be deemed that the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. Where an appeal against ex officio judgment of conviction against the part of the order for compensation among the original judgment is filed, the confirmation of the order for compensation shall be interrupted, the order for compensation shall be transferred to the appellate court along with the accused case (Article 33(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings), and even where the original judgment is maintained at the appellate court

(4) According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the defendant acquired 300,000 won from C, the applicant for compensation, and 240,000 won from I, respectively.