The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant: (a) committed the instant crime in the course of getting a loan to his daily life; (b) used the money received from the loan as living expenses; and (c) the Defendant would not repeat the instant crime against the truth.

In light of the fact that the court below's sentence (six months of imprisonment) declared by the defendant is too unreasonable.

2. The judgment appears to have an attitude against the defendant by breaking his mistake, and the fact that the defendant has no record of punishment is favorable to the defendant.

However, the Defendant served as a false tenant in the instant crime. The instant crime is a situation unfavorable to the Defendant, that is, the nature of the crime is not good in terms of the fact that: (a) the Defendant takes the role of a false tenant in the instant crime; (b) it is highly likely that the Defendant acquired false documents by deceptioning public funds in a planned and organized manner; and (c) it is highly likely to be subject to criticism; and (d) social harm is significant; (b) if the damage is not recovered from the instant crime, the loss incurred therefrom is ultimately attributable to the national tax; and thus, (c) it can return to the citizens.

In addition, by comparing the circumstances that the Defendant committed the instant crime, the circumstances after the commission of the crime, the age, environment, and sexual conduct, etc. of the Defendant, and the reasons for sentencing as shown in the records and arguments, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable even if considering the factors favorable to the Defendant, as seen earlier, even if it is considered that the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.

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