The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Defendant 1,560,00 won, G 950,000 won, and CV 370.

1. In a case where an appeal against a judgment of conviction in the scope of a judgment of this court is filed, the confirmation of a compensation order shall be prevented even without an objection to the compensation order, and the compensation order shall be transferred to the appellate court along with the defendant case (Article 33(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings). With respect to the grounds not ex officio examination, it shall be limited to cases where it is stated in the petition of appeal or it is included in the reasons for appeal submitted within the prescribed period, unless it is stated in the petition of appeal, and it is evident that the judgment may be rendered ex officio even if it is not included in the reasons for appeal only for the reasons affecting the judgment (see Supreme Court Decision 98Do1234, Sept. 22, 1998, etc.). The court below cited each application for compensation

The Defendant appealed against the lower judgment, but did not assert the grounds for appeal regarding each cited portion of the lower judgment’s respective compensation order, and even if ex officio examination, it cannot find the grounds for cancelling and amending each cited portion of the lower judgment’s respective compensation order. Therefore, each of the cited parts of the lower judgment remains intact.

2. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

3. 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 circumstances in which the Defendant recognized all criminal facts as recorded in the lower court, as well as partly repaid to the victim, are favorable to the Defendant.

However, the defendant was sentenced to criminal punishment for the same kind of crime and committed repeatedly during the period of repeated crime, and the fact that most of the victims are not agreed with is disadvantageous to the defendant.

The lower court, taking into account the aforementioned circumstances, shall punish the Defendant.