The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, for a period of two years from the date this ruling became final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Since facts constituting an offense in the judgment of the court below in the misapprehension of the legal principles are the same as a single criminal intent and the method of crime is the same, the court below viewed it as a single comprehensive crime, but there is an error of law in the judgment of the court below.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In a case where a single criminal intent is judged as to the assertion of misapprehension of the legal principles and deceptions the other party into mistake and takes the property over several times through the same method, the entire property shall be a single crime. However, even if the criminal intent is a single crime and the method of crime is the same, each victim's damage legal interest is independent even if the crime is committed with a single criminal intent, so the entire crime is not a single crime, and multiple types of frauds are established independently for each victim (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2001Do6130, Dec. 28, 2001). This case is back to the case, and the defendant committed a fraud in the judgment of the court below by deceiving the victims about 11 times separately, and even if the defendant's criminal intent is a single crime and the method of crime is identical, the defendant's argument in this part of the crime of fraud is not reasonable.

B. Although there are unfavorable circumstances such as the Defendant’s repeated defraudation against many unspecified victims, the Defendant agreed with the victim G, N, J, K, and M in an appellate trial, and the remainder victims deposit all the amount of damages, the Defendant recognized his mistake and reflects it, and the primary offender is more favorable. In addition, various sentencing conditions and sentencing guidelines indicated in the instant argument, such as the background of the instant crime, the circumstances after the instant crime, the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, and environment.