2. It is recognized that the Defendant recognized the instant crime and reflected the mistake, and agreed with the victim E in the crime of causing property damage.

However, the Defendant was only punished several times for the same crime, and even though he was sentenced to two years of probation on September 18, 2014 due to fraud and interference with business, etc. on September 18, 2014, which became final and conclusive on September 26, 2014, the Defendant committed the instant crime, and even if he did not submit any particular data on the recovery of damage from fraud up to the trial, etc., taking into account the circumstances unfavorable to the Defendant. Considering the balance with criminal punishment against other crimes similar to the instant crime, as well as the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, motive and background of the instant crime, means and method of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence of the lower court cannot be deemed to be excessively unreasonable.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.