All appeals by the defendant against the judgment of the court below Nos. 1 and 2 are dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) and the sentence of the first-class adjudication decision of KRW 500,00 against the accused (the penalty amount to KRW 500,00) and the second-class adjudication decision of KRW 2 (the imprisonment amount to KRW 8 months) are too unreasonable.

2. The defendant filed an appeal against the judgment of the court below Nos. 1 and 2 and tried both in the first instance trial. Since the judgment of the court of first instance only sentenced the defendant to a fine, the court of first instance cannot be punished by a fine heavier than this in the first instance trial in accordance with the principle of prohibition of disadvantageous alteration. As examined below, insofar as the court of first instance does not select both the criminal facts of the judgment of the court of first and second instances and sentence one punishment, the judgment of the court below on the ground of the consolidated trial itself does not constitute a ground for reversal. Thus, the judgment of the court below is not reversed on the ground of the consolidated trial, and the judgment of the court of first and second cases shall

A. The judgment of the court below against the judgment of the court below No. 1 is justified in light of the following: the defendant acknowledged the facts of the crime and reflects the facts of the crime; the defendant submitted a letter of agreement in the name of the victim at the time of the trial; the crime of this case and the criminal records recorded in the judgment of the court below against the defendant should be considered at the same time in relation to concurrent crimes after Article 37 of the Criminal Act; on the other hand, the defendant is punished for the same crime more than 30 times; the damage is deemed not to have been actually recovered; and other various circumstances, which are the conditions for sentencing specified in the records, such as the defendant's age, sex and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime; and the circumstances after the crime, are not too unreasonable. Thus, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

B. The judgment of the court below of the second instance is recognized that the defendant recognized the facts of the crime and is repented in depth, and that a written agreement in the name of the victim was submitted in the first instance court, but the defendant is the same kind of crime.