A. The Defendant committed the instant crime with mental or physical disorder is under the influence of alcohol, thereby having committed the instant crime in a state of mental or physical loss or mental weakness.

B. The punishment of the lower court (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the circumstances indicated in the record, such as the background leading up to each of the instant crimes, the Defendant’s behavior at the time of committing the instant crime, and the circumstances after committing the instant crime, the Defendant had no or weak ability to discern things or make decisions due to the main activity at the time of committing the instant crime.

Therefore, the above argument cannot be accepted.

B. The fact that the Defendant recognized the instant crime and opposed to the mistake, and that the amount of damage is a relatively small amount of damage is a relatively favorable circumstance.

However, the defendant made efforts to recover from damage to the fact that there are many criminal records of the same type of fraud due to the acquisition of a person without permission or the acquisition of a person without permission, the police officers who received the report desire to commit the crime, and the crime has been repeatedly committed, and the nature of the crime has been poor, and the case has been tried

It is disadvantageous that the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive, means, and consequence of the crime, and the various sentencing conditions indicated in the instant records and the previous theories, such as the circumstances after the crime, are not acknowledged as unfair because the lower court’s punishment is excessively unreasonable.

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

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.