The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. In light of the fact that the defendant is against the gist of the grounds for appeal, the punishment imposed by the court below (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The circumstances favorable to the Defendant include the fact that the Defendant recognized the facts charged and did not repeat the offense, and that the Defendant’s health status is not good.

However, there is a lot of frequency for the Defendant to sell or arrange the sale or purchase of a motor vehicle which has not been registered as a motor vehicle management business without registration, and the business period has not been less than that of the Defendant, and the profits acquired by the Defendant due to each of the crimes in this case seems not to be much significant. The Defendant continued to proceed with the crime in this case at the Seoul Western District Court at the time of stopping the crime in this case as the charge of embezzlement, and the Defendant continued to commit the crime in this case without going against the Defendant’s unfavorable circumstances.

In full view of the above circumstances and other circumstances shown in the records and pleadings, since the sentence imposed by the court below is too unreasonable, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

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

Article 25 of the Regulations on Criminal Procedure provides that "The Automobile Management Act (amended by Act No. 12146, Dec. 30, 2013) shall clearly state that "the former Automobile Management Act (amended by Act No. 12146, Dec. 30, 2013)" is a clerical error in the column for application of the statutes in the original judgment."