The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor for six months) of the lower court 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 it.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The fact that a defendant is both aware of his/her own crime and is against the law is favorable.

However, there are records that the defendant has already been punished several times due to the same kind of act, in particular, committed each of the crimes of this case without being aware of it during the period of repeated crime due to the same act of crime, the victims have suffered considerable mental and physical pain as well as economic damage. Nevertheless, the damage of the defendant is not recovered or not received from the victims, and the Internet goods sale fraud crime is a need for strict punishment for many unspecified persons.

The court below determined the punishment in consideration of all the above circumstances, and there is no change in the sentencing conditions that may be particularly considered in the trial.

In addition, considering the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, circumstances after the crime, equity with the punishment in the same and similar incidents, the lower court’s punishment is deemed reasonable, and it does not seem that it goes beyond the reasonable scope of discretion.

The defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is not accepted.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act because the defendant's appeal is without merit.