The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The defendant will pay 8,750,000 won to the applicant BF for the trial.

1. The lower court rendered a decision to dismiss each application for compensation filed by the petitioner E, F, H, and I for compensation.

An applicant for compensation cannot file an objection against a judgment dismissing an application for compensation pursuant to Article 32(4) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings. Therefore, each of the foregoing dismissed parts shall be excluded from the scope of the adjudication per party.

2. The decision of the court below on the gist of the reasons for appeal (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

3. The circumstances favorable to the defendant include: (a) the fact that the defendant recognized all of his mistake, and the defendant appears to have relatively little benefits from each of the crimes in this case; and (b) the fact that the defendant paid and agreed on the amount of damage to some victims, etc.

On the other hand, in light of the methods and contents of each of the crimes in this case, the severity of damage and the result thereof, etc., the fact that the defendant did not agree with the majority of the victims and seems to have failed to recover damage, and that the defendant has a number of punishment, including the suspended sentence of imprisonment, is disadvantageous to the defendant.

In addition, considering the following circumstances and the fact that the instant crime was committed on January 31, 2018 and the concurrent relationship between the crime of violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act and the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, it is necessary to determine the punishment in consideration of equity with the case where the judgment is rendered at the same time, it is difficult to view that the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable in light of the sentencing conditions indicated in the records, such as the Defendant’s age, sexual behavior, environment, family relationship, motive for the crime, and circumstances after the crime.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

4. In conclusion, the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the Defendant’s appeal is without merit, and the application for remedy order filed by the applicant for compensation at the trial is with merit. Thus, Articles 25(1), 31(1) and 31(2) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings are reasonable.