The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The court below erred by misunderstanding the facts or misunderstanding the legal principles, which did not reduce self-denunciation despite the fact that the defendant was found to have voluntarily surrendered to an investigation agency.

B. The punishment of the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the defendant cannot be deemed to have reported to an investigative agency by her mother through D, as well as the defendant, at the time when she was found to the prosecutor's office, when she was found to have worked on phiphones, and reported her own decision. Thus, this part of the defendant's assertion is rejected.

B. The Defendant’s mother’s improper sentencing reports directly to the investigation agency and appears in the court to guide the Defendant. The Defendant also has no favorable circumstances, such as recognizing the instant crime, submitting a large number of rebuttals, and reflecting in depth.

However, the Defendant not only was punished several times due to the same crime, but also was repeatedly punished during the period of repeated crime, and the sentence is inevitable for each crime of this case, and in light of the equity with the same and similar cases, it cannot be deemed that the term of the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.

Therefore, we cannot accept the defendant's above assertion.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.