2. Although the judgment of the court below is recognized that the damaged goods were returned to the victim and the defendant was in violation of the depth of the damage, the court below seems to have determined the punishment in consideration of all such circumstances, and there are no changes in circumstances that may be considered in the sentencing after the judgment of the court below, the defendant can have the record of identical criminal acts, and other circumstances, which are the conditions for sentencing under Article 51 of the Criminal Act, as stated in the records and arguments of this case, including the background, means and methods of the crime in this case, the circumstances after the crime, the age-oriented environment of the defendant, etc., are too unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.