The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to Articles 32(4) and 33(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings in the Trial Scope of this Court, where an application for compensation is rejected, the decision of rejection becomes immediately and conclusive and is not transferred to the appellate court. However, where an appeal against a conviction is filed, the portion of the order for compensation shall be transferred to the appellate court along with the case of the defendant.

In this case, the court below's dismissal of part of the applicant B's application for compensation and its determination became final and conclusive shall be excluded from the scope of this court's determination.

On the other hand, the part accepting the remainder of the court below's application for compensation was tried together with a conviction by the defendant by filing an appeal, but there was no indication of the grounds for appeal as to the part concerning the compensation order against the applicant for compensation in the petition of appeal and the statement of reasons for appeal submitted by the defendant, and even if ex officio, there is no ground for revocation

2. The sentence imposed by the lower court (ten months of imprisonment) on the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.

3. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and where the sentencing of the first instance 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). It is recognized that the Defendant led to confession and reflect, and endeavored to repay damage.

However, even though the Defendant was sentenced to the suspension of the execution of imprisonment due to a violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act in 2017, the period of the suspension of the execution of imprisonment has not yet lapsed, and again, the Defendant committed the instant crime, and it is not good that the Defendant used the money acquired from the injured party for gambling funds.

In addition, the records and arguments of this case, such as the fraud of money from the victim several times for a long time, the amount of the damage is significant, the damage was not actually recovered, and the damage was not received from the victim.