2. The amount of damage caused by the instant crime is about KRW 500,000,00, and the degree of damage cannot be deemed as significantly significant.

The Defendant recognized the instant crime and shown his attitude to repent of his mistake.

The defendant does not have the same criminal record as the crime of this case.

It seems that the economic situation of the defendant is not good.

Defendant has family members to be supported.

The defendant's wife appeals against the defendant.

However, the damage caused by the instant crime was not completely recovered, and the victim has maintained his/her intent to punish the Defendant.

The defendants have a past record of criminal punishment for six times (two times of suspended execution of imprisonment and four times of fine).

In relation to the instant crime, the amount of the first fine imposed on the Defendant according to the summary order was KRW 1 million, but the lower court imposed only KRW 700,000,000,000 compared to the above amount, which seems to have been due to the consideration of the circumstances favorable to the Defendant.

In addition, even if the defendant's age, career, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, social relation, motive and circumstance of the crime, method and consequence of the crime, etc. are added to all the sentencing factors indicated in the records and arguments, there is no new circumstance to deem that the sentencing conditions of the court below against the defendant have been changed in the first instance court, and it is not determined that the sentencing of the court below is unfair because it goes beyond reasonable discretion.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed on the ground that it is without merit.