The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The fact that the defendant's judgment on the grounds for appeal of this case is contrary to the recognition of the crime of this case, and that there is no record of punishment for the same kind of crime, etc. can be considered in favor of the defendant.

However, in light of the circumstances such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family relationship, background of the crime, circumstance after the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment (fine 3 million won) is too unreasonable, and thus, cannot be deemed unreasonable, considering the following circumstances: (a) the amount acquired by the Defendant is not indicated as KRW 14 million but used for gambling money; (b) no agreement was reached between the victim and the victim up to the trial; and (c) there was no other circumstance to deem the Defendant to have taken measures to recover from damage other than the details stated in the investigation agency; and (d) the Defendant was designated and arrested as a result of refusing a request for appearance by the investigation agency

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

However, in the application of the law of the lower judgment, the phrase “1. In the case of detention in the workhouse” under Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act is apparent that the phrase “Article 70 and 69(2) of the former Criminal Act” is a clerical error under Articles 70 and 69(2) of the former Criminal Act, and thus, it is apparent that it is a clerical error under Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure. Thus, the ex officio correction

.