The gist of the grounds for appeal by the defense counsel is that the punishment imposed by the defendant (two years of suspended sentence in October, and one hundred and twenty hours of community service order) is too unreasonable.

Therefore, it is true that there are extenuating circumstances for the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant recognized all of the crimes of this case, and divided his mistake, and that the defendant recovered 1's check No. 1 per year in the annexed sheet of crime as indicated in the judgment of the court below, and that the bill No. 8 was submitted with respect to the previous eight checks, etc.

However, in full view of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant committed each of the instant crimes even though he/she had been sentenced two times to suspended sentence due to the same type of crime; (b) the sum of the number or face value of the checks issued by the Defendant is not specified; and (c) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime; and (d) other circumstances that form the conditions for the pleadings and the sentencing indicated in the record, including the circumstances that the Defendant and his/her defense counsel asserted as grounds for appeal, it is unreasonable to deem that the Defendant’s punishment is too excessive to the extent that the sentence imposed by the lower court should

Therefore, the defendant and his defense counsel's assertion is without merit.

Therefore, the defendant's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.