The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the second crime: imprisonment with prison labor for not less than two months, and the first, third through seven crimes: imprisonment for one year and nine months) of the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. In relation to the crime No. 2 of the judgment, the fact that the defendant recognized and reflected the crime, and that the above victim does not want the punishment of the defendant under an agreement with the victim K at the court below is favorable.

However, the fact that a repeated crime was committed during the period of the repeated crime, and the nature of the crime is not less and less than 30 million won, and the amount of damage is less than 30 million won.

The fact that it cannot be seen is an unfavorable circumstance.

With respect to the crimes of Nos. 1, 3, and 7 of the ruling, the defendant recognized and reflected the defendant's crime, the fact that some victims do not want the defendant's punishment under an agreement with N, T, and V among the victims in the judgment of the court below, and that some victims such as E and G appear to have considerable responsibility for the occurrence of crime or the expansion of damage, and that some damage seems to have been recovered, and that equity in the case of judgment simultaneously with the ruling of the final judgment is more favorable.

However, the above part of the crime was committed by acquiring money exceeding KRW 400 million repeatedly against many victims for a considerable period of time, and the nature of the crime is heavy and the result of the crime is heavy, and some of the crimes was committed during the period of repeated crime, and the defendant was punished several times for the same crime (amount of punishment, suspension of execution, and punishment).

Comprehensively taking account of the above circumstances and other factors of sentencing as indicated in the records of this case, including the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive, means, and consequence, the lower court’s respective sentences are too too high in view of the fact that, in the case of a crime related to the “O” region where the Defendant asserted, the performance of the contract under the total sales contract is not proper, and thus, the victims have failed to perform the contract.