2. The judgment of the court below is deemed proper in full view of all the circumstances that form the conditions for the arguments and the sentencing of this case, including favorable circumstances, such as the fact that the defendant recognized the crime of this case, the crime of paragraph (1) of the judgment of the court below was committed in depth, and the crime of paragraph (2) of the judgment of the court below was committed in attempted crimes, and the property damage amount caused by the crime of this case was merely 13,000 won, and the defendant committed the crime of this case under the suspension of execution due to the same kind of crime, and the defendant committed the crime of this case repeatedly over two times. In particular, even though the defendant was under trial due to the crime of paragraph (1) of the judgment of the court below, even though he was committed due to the crime of this case, the crime of this case was committed by intrusion upon the structure, and the attitude and character of the defendant, environment, victims, and the motive and means of the crime of this case, and the motive and result of the crime of this case, the circumstance after the crime of this case, and the sentence of this case becomes invalidated.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

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

[However, since it is apparent that "victim D" is a clerical error of "victim I" in the facts constituting the crime of the original judgment, it shall be corrected ex officio in accordance with Article 25 (1) of the Regulations on Criminal Procedure.]