The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental statements in the grounds of appeal not timely filed).

The judgment below

Examining the evidence duly adopted by the first instance court, which maintained the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below was just in finding the victim E guilty of fraud among the facts charged in the instant case on the grounds stated in its reasoning, and there was no error of exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation in violation of logical and empirical rules, or of misapprehending the legal principles on the intent of deception and deception, without failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

In addition, Article 35 of the Criminal Act that provides for the aggravated punishment of repeated crimes cannot be deemed to violate the Constitution (see Constitutional Court Order 2012HunBa262, 374 (Joint) decided September 26, 2013, etc.). Thus, the argument that Article 35 of the Criminal Act is unconstitutional is rejected.

Meanwhile, the argument that the court below erred in failing to properly consider the equity with the case where the judgment was rendered at the same time as the crime which became final and conclusive pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act constitutes an unfair argument for sentencing.

Therefore, under Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in the case where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years has been imposed, an appeal may be filed on the grounds of unfair sentencing. As such, in the instant case where a minor sentence has been imposed against the Defendant, the argument that the amount of the punishment is unfair is not a legitimate

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.