The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the reasons for appeal (4 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. In a case 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, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court determined the sentence against the Defendant by comprehensively taking into account all the conditions of the pleadings of the instant case, including the following: (a) the amount of the instant defrauded money exceeds KRW 43 million; (b) the amount equivalent to the amount of the defrauded money has not been recovered up to the present; and (c) the Defendant is recognized and against the Defendant’s mistake; and (d) the instant crime is a concurrent crime with the first head of the crime of the lower court’s judgment; and (b) the equity of the sentence with the case of the said judgment at the same time as the said crime of fraud, sex, environment, family relationship, motive and circumstance after the crime was committed.

The sentencing of the lower court appears to have been conducted within the reasonable scope of discretion by fully taking into account the above conditions of sentencing, and there is no change in the sentencing condition that can be deemed unfair to maintain the sentencing of the lower court as it is. Therefore, it is difficult to view that the lower court’s sentencing is unfair because it is too unreasonable.

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

3. 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. It is so decided as per Disposition.