The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below against the defendant on the summary of the reasons for appeal (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The court below sentenced the above punishment to the defendant on account of the sentencing as stated in its reasoning. The circumstances favorable to the defendant, which the defendant cited in the grounds for appeal, are most circumstances already considered by the court below while determining the punishment, and it is reasonable to respect the sentencing of the court below in this case where there are no changes in circumstances that can be newly considered in the court below.

In addition, considering the sentencing guidelines of the Supreme Court sentencing committee and the records of this case, it is difficult to deem that the case constitutes "where the victim has a considerable responsibility for the occurrence of crimes or the expansion of damage," which is the mitigation factor in the sentencing guidelines, as alleged by the defendant, and considering that the sentencing guidelines stipulate "where the crime has been committed repeatedly for a considerable period," it is reasonable for the court below to determine that the defendant's crime constitutes the basic area in the sentencing guidelines.

Even if considering all the sentencing conditions specified in the instant pleadings, such as the Defendant’s age, health status, motive and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

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