The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal: The lower court’s imprisonment (six months of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

2. As stated in the reasoning of the sentencing, the lower court determined the Defendant’s punishment by fully taking account of the overall circumstances regarding the sentencing, and there is no change in the conditions of new sentencing that may be particularly considered in the trial.

On the other hand, the defendant asserts to the effect that community service order is unfair for 80 hours imposed by the court below on the grounds of health.

However, the court below held that the order of the defendant to provide a community service for 80 hours is reasonable within the reasonable scope of discretion, considering the following: (a) the court below granted the defendant an opportunity to do so by suspending the execution of imprisonment with labor, taking into account the favorable circumstances as stated in its reasoning; (b) the defendant is given an opportunity to do so; (c) the community service order was imposed as a result of learning in depth in society; (d) the specific method and timing of the community service order can be determined in a flexible manner by the competent probation office taking into account all the circumstances such as the defendant's health condition at the execution stage; and (e) it is difficult to view

Therefore, it is not recognized that the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable because it is too large.

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