The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the lower court’s punishment (two months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and where the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In light of the following, the lower court determined the sentence by comprehensively taking into account both the circumstances favorable to the Defendant and the unfavorable circumstances, and even if considering the normal data submitted in the first instance court, there is a change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the lower court.

It is difficult to evaluate the sentencing of the lower court, and even considering the various sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments of the instant case, the lower court’s sentencing was so excessive that it exceeded the scope of reasonable discretion in sentencing.

It does not seem that it does not appear.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion 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.

[Provided, in the application of the law of the court below, the "Article 280 and Article 276 of the Criminal Act (the attempted confinement)" of the "Article 280 and Article 276 of the Criminal Act concerning the 1. criminal facts" is obvious that it is a clerical error in the "Article 280 and Article 276 (1) of the Criminal Act (the attempted confinement)", and thus, it shall be corrected ex officio in accordance with Article 25 (1) of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure.