The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor for one year and ten months) of the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination is an element of sentencing favorable to the Defendant, such as the fact that the Defendant recognized each of the instant crimes, the fact that the Defendant was arrested during the withdrawal of the amount of damage by the victimO, and the fact that the damage of the victimO was not realized, and that the Defendant did not have much profits from each of

On the other hand, in order to eradicate the singishing crime, it is necessary to punish the persons who participated in the crime with strong punishment, and the defendant takes an essential role in the completion of the singishing crime and the realization of the profit as a means of remittance, and thus the degree of participation is not less and less, the victim C and L are not recovered, and the defendant has a criminal record of suspended execution due to the singishing.

In addition, the lower court did not change the sentencing conditions that may be newly considered in this court compared to the lower court, comprehensively taking into account the above factors of sentencing.

In addition, considering the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, criminal records, motive and background leading to the instant crime, and circumstances after the instant crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is only within the reasonable scope of discretion, and it is not deemed unfair because it is too unreasonable.

3. The defendant's appeal is without merit and thus dismissed pursuant to Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.