The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the reasons for appeal (unfair sentencing) by the court below is too unreasonable.

2. The fact that the Defendant’s mistake is recognized as a whole is against the Defendant’s reputation, and the special intimidation, interference with business, special assault, and insult in this case appears to have committed contingent acts under the influence of alcohol, and the Defendant’s health conditions are not good, such as having a physical disability, etc., are considered favorable to the Defendant.

On the other hand, the Defendant, through four times, caused substantial inconvenience to the residents by diving the valves of the water meters of multi-households in which they reside, thereby making the water supply of public drinking water.

In addition, the defendant, on the ground that he did not express his mind for the response of his employees while eating food at a restaurant, insulting the employees, threatened the above employees and the restaurant owners on the door, which is a dangerous object, and assaulted with the pedestrian auxiliary device, which is a dangerous object, by affixing the chest of the above restaurant, and interfere with the duties of the above restaurant.

In light of the contents, methods, and circumstances of the crime, each of the crimes in this case is not good, and the victims seems to have suffered considerable mental shock.

Nevertheless, the defendant did not receive a letter from the victims.

Such circumstances are disadvantageous to the defendant.

In light of these circumstances, in full view of all the sentencing conditions as shown in the arguments in the instant case, including the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, etc., it does not seem that the lower court’s sentence against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

3. Accordingly, the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is groundless.