The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) by the lower court (one year 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 fact that the whole crime is recognized and the mistake is divided, the defendant has paid the full amount of damages to most victims except for some victims, the defendant's family members want to take a preference against the defendant, and the defendant has been 30 months or less.

However, the period of the instant crime is not short, and the victim committed the instant crime against the unspecified majority, and the victim committed the instant crime more than 40 times, but the victim is relatively small, the total amount of damage exceeds 13 million won, and the Defendant is sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment due to fraud under the same law prior to the occurrence of the crime, and the possibility of criticism and the high risk of recidivism are disadvantageous circumstances.

The court below determined a punishment by taking into account the above circumstances equally, and there is no change in the special sentencing conditions that could otherwise determine the sentence of the court below when the court below was in the first instance.

In addition, in full view of the various circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, sex and environment, the background, means and consequence of the commission of the crime, and the circumstances after the commission of the crime, even if considering the result of the sentencing examination in the court below, the lower court’s punishment is deemed to be appropriate, and the lower court’s punishment is excessively heavy, beyond the reasonable scope of discretion.

It does not seem that it does not appear.

The defendant's argument of sentencing is not accepted.

3. 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 groundless.