The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the court below (one year of imprisonment) on the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and where the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015, etc.). The victim expressed his/her intention that the damaged object of the instant crime is only KRW 500,000 in cash, and that the victim D does not want to be punished by the Defendant at the lower court.

However, even though the Defendant was sentenced to eight months of imprisonment on August 17, 2016 due to fraud, etc. and completed the execution of the sentence on January 26, 2017, the Defendant constitutes a repeated crime, thereby committing the instant crime, and there is no new change in circumstances that may change the sentence of the lower court in the first instance.

In addition, when comprehensively considering the sentencing conditions, such as the defendant's age, background of the crime, family relation, etc. as shown in the deliberation of the court below and the party, and the scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines (one year to two years), the punishment sentenced by the court below is conducted within the reasonable scope of discretion, and is not hot.

3. According to the conclusion, Defendant’s appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition (Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure: (i) ex officio pursuant to Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, the term “three-month mitigation” under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act is deleted, and the term “six-month period to ten years” under Article 3 of the Rules on Criminal Procedure is amended to “one year to twenty years”.