The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than five months.

However, for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. The sentence imposed by the court below (five months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The facts charged of the instant case, even though the Defendant did not have the intent or ability to repay the money even if he borrowed money, by deceiving the victim by deceiving the victim by expressing a false fact that he would give a high interest by expressing a false apartment charter contract to the victim, and by deceiving the victim, and by deceiving the victim, it is not easy to punish the illegal act in light of the method of crime, the amount of defraudation, etc.

Furthermore, it is difficult to view that the Defendant is under the risk of repeating a crime by repeatedly committing the same crime, even if having been punished twice by the same crime, and even if having been punished twice a fine, by repeating the same crime.

In addition, considering the fact that the defendant committed the crime of this case as part of the crime led by E at the time, it is necessary to strictly punish the defendant.

However, from the time of the initial investigation, the Defendant showed the attitude of recognizing the crime of this case from the time of the initial investigation and breaking his mind in depth, and actively cooperate in the investigation.

Furthermore, when the defendant is in a trial, the victim does not want the punishment of the defendant.

In addition, it seems that the actual gains that the Defendant acquired by himself from the instant crime ( approximately three million won in the name of commission) are much less than the amount of fraud, and the instant crime is committed on July 25, 2014 by the Seoul Western District Court sentenced the Defendant to imprisonment with prison labor on October 15, 2014 and the judgment finalized on October 15, 2014 and the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act should take into account the equity with the case where the Defendant was tried together in relation to concurrent crimes under the concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. Other circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, intelligence and environment, relationship with the victim, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., are all the conditions