The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The defendant shall pay 37,100,000 won to B who is an applicant for compensation.

3.2

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal that the court below sentenced the defendant (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the judgment of the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). It is recognized that the confessions and reflects by the defendant, and that the defendant has no record of criminal punishment in Korea.

However, in full view of all the circumstances revealed in the records and arguments of this case, including the fact that the amount acquired by the defendant exceeds a total of 50 million won, the sum of the amount not paid by the defendant exceeds a total of 140 million won, and a part of the victims want to be punished by the defendant at the trial, etc., the sentence imposed by the court below against the defendant is not heavier.

3. B, which is the subject of the judgment on the application for the remedy order at the trial, filed an application for remedy order with the Defendant seeking payment of KRW 37.1 million against the Defendant.

According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the trial court, the defendant can recognize the fact that the defendant acquired 73 million won from B who is an applicant for compensation, and the defendant made a statement that he/she recognized the application for compensation by the applicant for compensation (the amount of compensation claim: 37.1 million won) during the first trial of the court below.

Therefore, since the above application for compensation is well-grounded, the defendant is obligated to pay KRW 37.1 million to B, who is the applicant for compensation, within the scope of the money obtained by fraud.

4. According to the conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed pursuant to Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit, and since the application for compensation filed by B, which is the applicant for compensation for the trial, is well-grounded, Article 25 (1) and Article 31 (1) and (2) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, the defendant shall be ordered