2. The Defendant voluntarily removed one container installed without permission from the head of Gwanak-gu Office.

The Defendant appears not only to cooperate with the investigation but also to repent of his mistake by recognizing the crime of this case.

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

However, without good cause, the Defendant failed to comply with the order of the head of Gwanak-gu Office to remove the above container by October 10, 2017. However, the liability for the crime is not weak.

All the defendants have a record of criminal punishment for up to 18 times (four times of suspension of execution of sentence and 14 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 3 million (the Defendant alleged that the amount of the fine was KRW 2 million, but this appears to have been caused by mistake), but the lower court imposed only KRW 2 million, which is less than the above amount, and it seems that the circumstances favorable to the Defendant were considered.

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.