The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Of the judgment of the court below, ① “the foregoing amount” in the 9th page of the judgment of the court below is the same.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment and six months) of the lower court’s sentence is too unreasonable.

2. If there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the judgment of the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, the appellate court is reasonable to respect it.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court, as indicated in its holding, determined the sentence against the Defendant by comprehensively taking account of all favorable circumstances and unfavorable circumstances for the Defendant.

In addition to the various sentencing conditions indicated in the records and arguments of this case including the fact that the defendant still failed to use the sentence from the victim and has not repaid the amount additionally, the sentencing of the court below is reasonable to respect the sentencing of the court below on the grounds that the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable and it does not seem to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion given to the court below, and thus it is reasonable to respect the sentencing of the court below.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is not accepted.

3. The defendant's appeal is without merit and thus dismissed pursuant to Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. The decision of the court below is delivered with a decision to correct it ex officio in accordance with Article 25 (1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, since there is a clear clerical error as stated in the order.