2. The judgment of the court below is a favorable circumstance that the defendant made a confession of the crime of this case and reflects the victim's wrongness, that some victims do not want the punishment of the defendant, and that the economic situation is not good. However, the crime of this case does not lead to repeated theft or theft of property owned by the victims by infringing upon the victim's residence by means of damaging correction devices using drones 39 times in total from March 2015 to June 2015, and it does not bring about such intent. In light of the crime period and frequency of the crime, expertise and interview of the number of crimes, and the risk of the crime itself, which can expand or develop as serious crimes, the crime of this case is poor; since the victim's total amount of damage from the crime of this case is equivalent to KRW 60,000,000,000,000, and most of the victims and victims do not reach the age limit of the crime of this case; the defendant does not appear to have been sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for the same kind of crime and its execution period after the crime of this case.

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