The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The defendant shall pay 5 million won to the applicant for compensation by fraud.

3.2

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment and imprisonment for two years and six months) of the lower court’s sentence against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Although the Defendant led to the confession of the instant crime, in full view of various circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the instant crime, the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable, considering the following: (a) the victims of unspecified and large number of victims have continuously committed the instant crime; (b) the nature of the crime was serious in light of the content and circumstances of the crime; (c) the amount acquired by the defrauded was high; and (d) the considerable amount of damage recovery was not performed; and (e) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, motive, means and consequence of the crime; and

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed pursuant to Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. Since the applicant for compensation is well-grounded, it is accepted pursuant to Articles 25 (1) and 31 (1) and (2) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Litigation, etc., and provisional execution is attached to the above compensation order pursuant to Article 31 (3) of the same Act.

(A) The Defendant submitted relevant data to the applicant for compensation at the trial on May 23, 2019, if he/she repaid KRW 7 million to the applicant for compensation at the trial. However, the Defendant, after the date and time, acquired KRW 5 million from the applicant for compensation at the trial on June 13, 2019, and according to the records, the above KRW 7 million was paid by the Defendant as the price for merchandise coupons prior to the crime, and was paid by the applicant for compensation on the ground of delay in delivery of merchandise coupons, not the amount repaid to the victim after the crime.