2. The facts that the judgment of the defendant recognized all of the crimes and reflected, the amount of damage by each victim is not higher than the amount, and M among the victims, the defendant's wife is considered as favorable.

However, in consideration of the fact that the Defendant committed each of the instant crimes again during the same repeated crime period, the Defendant committed the same crime for a long time, and the number of times of criminal punishment regularly exceeds 10 times, the Defendant committed a similarless crime, and in this case, the Defendant took the nearest 7 plenary session between the Defendant and the week, and the poor behavior in the process of theless taking was committed, and the Defendant was already subject to a fine twice for the same crime committed during the period of repeated crime due to the first head recorded in the judgment of the lower court, but again committed the instant crimes, it is necessary to strictly punish the Defendant.

In addition, in full view of the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, health status, family relationship, circumstances leading to the commission of the offense, means and consequence, etc., and all of the sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments of this case, including the circumstances after the commission of the offense, the sentence imposed by the lower court is appropriate and the sentencing judgment by the lower court exceeded the reasonable bounds of discretion.

There are no circumstances such as evaluation or maintenance of it is deemed unfair.

Therefore, since the sentence imposed by the court below is too unreasonable, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

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.