The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Determination of the summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair punishment in one year and six months) is unreasonable;

2. The sentence imposed by the court below is within the recommended range (one year to three years) according to the sentencing guidelines set out in the attached Form.

In consideration of the sentencing factors favorable to the defendant's reflectivity, the punishment was determined in consideration of the crime period of the same repeated crime, the number of victims and the amount of fraud, and the recovery of the damage.

There is no change in sentencing elements in the appellate court.

Even if this court re-examines the sentencing factors and other factors of sentencing which are set forth in the sentencing guidelines for fraud, the determination of the original sentence is inappropriate.

3. The appeal by the defendant is without merit.

The dismissal under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act is dismissed.

[The provision of Article 35 of the Criminal Procedure Act, in the application of the law of the original trial, is clear that it erreds the entry of “Article 35 of the Criminal Act (with respect to each crime of fraud as stated in Article 2019 piece25 of the Criminal Procedure Act),” and thus, ex officio correction is made in accordance with Article 25(1) of the