The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Disposition No. 2 of the judgment of the court below, No. 1-b. 1, and No. 2-1.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the reasons for appeal (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. In full view of all other circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court does not seem to be unfair because the sentence imposed by the Defendant is adequate and too unreasonable, and is too unreasonable, in light of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant was serving the same kind of force as well as serving the Defendant during the repeated crime period after release; (b) the amount of damage was not so significant but does not seem to have any effort to recover damage; and (c) the amount of punishment imposed by the Defendant is not so significant; and (d) all other circumstances that form the conditions for sentencing specified in the oral proceedings, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime.

3. According to the conclusion, the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition by the court below on the following grounds: (a) 2 of the Criminal Procedure Act; (b) 1 of the Criminal Procedure Act; (c) 2-2 of the Criminal Procedure Act; (d) 4 of the 2-B; and (c) 2-3 of the 2-3-4 of the 2-2 of the 2-3-2 of the 2-4 Act; and (e) the “C” is a clerical error in the “J”; and (e) the “each credit specialized financial business Act” in the application of the statutes is a clerical error in the “Act on the Specialized Credit Business”, and thus,