The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the punishment prescribed by the court of the original instance (two months of imprisonment, six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The judgment seems to have led to the confession and reflect on the crime.

Since some crimes are in the relation of special larceny for which judgment has become final and conclusive and the concurrent crimes after Article 37 of the Criminal Code, it is necessary to determine punishment in consideration of equity in the case of judgment at the same time.

However, the criminal liability of the defendant who has caused serious damage to women who have taught repeatedly does not correspond to those of the defendant.

Special larceny has been avoided and being sentenced to two years of suspended sentence of six months. Despite the grace period (up to February 2019), the crime of bodily injury, assault, damage of property, etc. has been continued.

In addition to the two criminal records, it is inevitable to keep juveniles under detention for a considerable period of time in order to lower the possibility of recidivism.

The victim was unable to receive the victim's statement.

The court of the court below rendered the sentence against the defendant by taking account of the aforementioned various positive and negative circumstances.

The judgment below

There is no new circumstance that can be considered in sentencing as a result of the sentence.

In addition, in full view of various sentencing conditions stipulated in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, such as the defendant's age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the situation before and after the crime, the sentence of the court below is not hot.

3. Thus, the defendant's appeal is not reasonable, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

The proviso of Article 186 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act shall apply to litigation costs.