All appeals filed by prosecutors and defendants are dismissed.

The defendant shall receive 10,000,000 won from S who is an applicant for compensation.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

A. The prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unhued and unreasonable.

B. The lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.

Judgment

The fact that the defendant has recognized his mistake and that the defendant has no criminal record of the same kind is a favorable sentencing factor.

On the other hand, the defendant's amount of damage caused by the crime of this case is large to KRW 160 million, but no damage has yet been recovered, and the defendant continuously applied for postponement of sentence while promising the victim E to recover the damage several times in the trial process, and the victim E is expected to have suffered an additional mental suffering, and the victim E continuously desires to pay severe punishment against the defendant.

In addition, considering the circumstances of the instant crime, circumstances after the instant crime was committed, the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, etc. as well as the scope of recommended sentences according to the sentencing guidelines of the Sentencing Committee (general fraud type 2 (at least KRW 100 million, but less than KRW 500 million): imprisonment with labor for a year to 4 years), etc., it is not recognized that the lower court’s punishment is too heavy or unreasonable. Thus, the Defendant and the prosecutor’s assertion are without merit.

In conclusion, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is all dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. The application for compensation order filed by S who is an applicant for compensation is accepted in accordance with Articles 25 (1) and 31 (1) through (3) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Litigation, etc., and the application for compensation filed by E who is the applicant for compensation is not accepted after the closing of argument at the court of the trial and is therefore inappropriate, so it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices pursuant to Articles 32 (1)

However, "victim I" in Part 18 of the second judgment of the court below is among the "victim S" and the summary of evidence.