The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal: The lower court’s imprisonment (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The determination of sentencing is based on the statutory penalty, with a discretionary determination that takes place within a reasonable and appropriate scope, taking into account the factors constituting the conditions for sentencing prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, based on which our Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the principle of directness, has a unique area of the first instance trial regarding the

In addition to these circumstances and the ex post facto nature of the appellate court, it is reasonable to respect the sentencing conditions in cases where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, and to refrain from rendering a sentence that does not differ from the first instance court on the sole ground that the sentence of the first instance falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, even though the sentence of the first instance court is somewhat different from the opinion of the appellate court,

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). As stated in the grounds for sentencing, the lower court determined a punishment by fully taking into account the overall circumstances regarding the sentencing of the Defendant, as stated in the reasoning for sentencing. In full view of the records of the instant case and various sentencing conditions on the Defendant, the lower court’s punishment is not deemed to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

On the other hand, although the circumstance that the defendant recognized the crime of fraud which was denied by the court below for the first time is changed, considering the circumstances leading to the above crime, the method of crime and the degree of damage inflicted on the victim, etc., it is difficult to deem that there exists a change in the sentencing condition to the extent that it is unreasonable to maintain the sentence of the court below just by changing the above circumstances.

Considering this, the circumstances alleged by the Defendant as the grounds for appeal cannot be deemed unfair.

Therefore, the defendant's inappropriate sentencing.