The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

2. As to the determination of sentencing, it is reasonable to respect the sentencing of the first instance court in the event that the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, since the first instance court’s inherent area exists in the determination of sentencing.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In full view of the circumstances (such as the fact that the nature of the crime is not good, the fact that a majority of the punishment was committed by violence, etc., and the fact that the current period of suspension of execution is currently under suspension of execution) that are shown in the records and pleadings of the instant case, even if the Defendant considers all of the circumstances (such as the fact that all of the criminal acts are recognized and the damage is not significant) that are favorable for the reasons for appeal, even if the Defendant considers as the reasons for appeal (such as the fact that there is a certificate of existence of serious alcohol by a basic livelihood recipient, the fact that the amount of damage was repaid, the Defendant’s living relationship, etc.), the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable, and the Defendant’s argument is not acceptable since there is no discovery of new circumstances to consider in the trial.

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

However, pursuant to Article 25 (1) of the Regulations on Criminal Procedure, ex officio correction of "91,370" in the 11th letter of the judgment of the court below to "91,370 won" shall be made.

.