2. The court below held that the defendant's crime is divided and reflected, the size of goods purchased with a stolen credit card is relatively small, and certain damaged goods are returned to the victim, the crime of this case is not good, and it is not good that it uses a credit card acquired in the process of committing a repeated crime; the defendant repeats the crime during the repeated crime period; the defendant repeats a majority of the criminal records; the damages have not been recovered; the defendant's age, sexual behavior, environment, motive and means of the crime; and the circumstances after the crime, etc., considered various sentencing conditions in the records and arguments of this case, and determined a sentence within the scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines (one year of imprisonment).

The grounds for unfair sentencing (a confession, reflectivity, existence of dependent family members) alleged by the defendant are already considered in determining the punishment against the defendant or the above conditions of sentencing have changed.

Considering the above sentencing conditions, the sentence of the court below is considered to be reasonable within the reasonable scope of discretion.

Defendant

The argument 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.