The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the court below (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015, etc.). The lower court determined a punishment in consideration of the following: (a) the Defendant committed the instant crime without being aware of the fact that the same criminal records exist several times; (b) the Defendant committed the instant crime even during the period of repeated crime; and (c) the drinking water is considerably high; and (d) there are no new circumstances that may change the sentence of the lower court in the trial.

In addition, comprehensively taking into account various sentencing conditions, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, criminal records, criminal method and circumstances, etc., as shown in the hearing of the court below and the party branch, the sentence imposed by the court below is not hot within the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.