2. The judgment was made in depth and against the Defendant’s mistake, there are some circumstances that may be somewhat taken into account the motive and circumstance leading to the instant crime, the Defendant appears to have significantly less economic circumstances, and the Defendant has no specific criminal history other than before the following previous convictions. However, the lower court seems to have already reduced the fine prescribed in the summary order by taking into account such circumstances into account. Moreover, the Defendant was committed on January 4, 2013 without being aware of the fact that he was sentenced to the suspension of sentence on the same law and content, and at the same time committed the instant crime without being informed of the fact that he was committed more than 11 months, and the period of the instant crime was not shorter than 11 months. Considering the motive, means and consequence of the instant crime, the circumstances, age, character and conduct of the Defendant after the crime, intelligence and environment, the lower court’s punishment cannot be accepted, and thus, the Defendant’s assertion is inappropriate.

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