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. The judgment below held that the defendant recognized the crime of this case, the damaged articles returned to the victim and expressed his intention to punish the defendant, and the defendant committed the crime of this case on the grounds of economic difficulties as the deaf in the second degree of hearing disability and the deaf in the second degree of hearing disability, and the defendant had access to the person who was under the influence of alcohol in the subway in the subway and got out of money and valuables.

In other words, the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for up to eight months in consideration of the following circumstances: (a) there has been the history of having been punished several times as a result of the theft of the law, and (b) the method of the crime was planned, professional, and (c) the crime was committed before the judgment, even though it was committed during the period of repeated crime; and (d) the criminal committed

In light of the sentencing conditions acknowledged by the court below, since the sentencing of the court below seems to be within the scope of reasonable discretion, and there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared to the court below in the first instance, the sentencing of the court below cannot be deemed to be unfair because the sentencing of the court below is too unreasonable.

3. According to the 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.