The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the court below (one year of imprisonment) on the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.

2. It is recognized that the judgment of the defendant led to the confession of all crimes, and that his mistake is divided, and that both the victims have agreed to do so.

However, the Defendant has been sentenced to a fine on several occasions and has been sentenced to a suspended sentence three times, from among them, the Defendant committed each of the crimes of this case without being aware of the period of suspended execution, and at the same time, without being able to do so due to the same kind of crime, in light of the form of each of the crimes of this case, the method and frequency of each of the crimes of this case, and there is no change of circumstances that may otherwise determine the age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of each of the crimes of this case, and the scope of recommended sentencing guidelines for the enactment of the Sentencing Committee of the Supreme Court, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, and sex, environment, the motive, means and consequence of each of the crimes of this case, etc., it is not recognized that the sentence of the lower court is unfair because it is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. As such, the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit, and is so decided as per Disposition (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 201Da3921, Jul. 28, 2016). However, in the judgment of the court below, “the same day” of the 2016 senior group 3921, May 28, 2016, and “the same day” of the 5th class is each clerical error of “the 2016. May 28, 2016.” As such, the correction is made ex officio pursuant to Article 25(1) of the Regulations on Criminal Procedure.