2. It is the sentencing factor favorable to the Defendant that the Defendant recognized all of his criminal acts when the Defendant was in the first instance, against whom all of his criminal acts are recognized, the amount of damage in this case is not so large, and the economic difficulties are likely to lead to the instant criminal acts.

However, even though the Defendant was sentenced to a two-year suspended sentence on July 2, 2015 on the 10th day of the same month after he was sentenced to a two-year suspended sentence on July 2, 2015, and the judgment became final and conclusive on the 10th day of the same month, the Defendant did not agree with the victims, and was not completely recovered from the victims, and there is no change in circumstances that may be considered in sentencing after the judgment of the court below is an element of sentencing unfavorable to the Defendant.

In addition, considering the various factors of sentencing prescribed by Article 51 of the Criminal Act, such as the defendant's age, criminal records, and family relations, the sentence of the court below cannot be deemed unfair because it is too large.

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.