The part of the judgment of the court of first instance excluding the compensation order, and the part against Defendant A and Defendant of the judgment of the court of second instance.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The punishment sentenced by Defendant A (the first instance court: the imprisonment of August and the second instance court: the imprisonment of April) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant AI’s type of fraud against Victim AK, which the lower court sentenced (in the case of the 2014 high group 1634 case at the market time: imprisonment with prison labor for one month, 2014 high group 1340, 2014 high group 1634 high group 1634, 2014 high group excluding Victim AK, and each crime of fraud against ten victims, 2014 high group 1696, 2014 high group 1734, 2014 high group 2064 high group : imprisonment with prison labor for seven months) is too unreasonable.

C. The punishment sentenced by the second instance court against the Defendants is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. We examine Defendant A ex officio prior to the determination of the grounds for appeal by the Defendant and the grounds for appeal by the Prosecutor against the Defendant.

This Court held two appeals cases against the defendant in the judgment of the court below concurrently and tried, and each offense in the judgment of the court below is concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and thus, one punishment shall be imposed pursuant to Article 38 (1) of the Criminal Act. In this regard, the part of the judgment of the court of first instance except compensation order and the part of the judgment of the court of second instance against the

B. Defendant AI is deemed to have been led to the confession and reflect of the part of the crime of fraud against Victim AK in the judgment 1634 of the Decision 2014Ra1634, and the damage of this case is relatively small. However, on the other hand, the Defendant was punished for the same kind of crime. In particular, on February 11, 2014, the Defendant committed the above crime immediately after the sentence was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for imprisonment with prison labor for a crime similar to the crime of this case was sentenced to a suspended sentence of six months on February 11, 2014, and other various sentencing conditions specified in the records and arguments of this case, considering the above judgment, the sentencing of this part of the judgment of the second instance is too heavy or unreasonable. Therefore, the Defendant and the prosecutor’s argument are without merit.