The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the court below (one year and four 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 (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court determined a punishment in consideration of the following: (a) the Defendant is against the victim; (b) the Defendant agreed with the victims; (c) the Defendant appears to have used most of the funds received from the victims for the actual investment in stocks; (d) the Defendant has been punished several times for the same crime; (b) the Defendant committed the instant crime without being aware of the repeated crime due to the same crime; (c) the amount of damage exceeds KRW 145 million; and (d) there are no new circumstances to change the sentence of

Considering the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, motive and background of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc. as revealed in the oral arguments at the lower court and the party hearing, the sentence imposed by the lower court is not hot, as it takes place within the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.