The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence of the lower court (one-year imprisonment) is too unreasonable as to the gist of the grounds for appeal.

2. The judgment of the Defendant recognized all of the crimes of this case and reflected, and agreed with the victim D to commit the crime of destroying property of this case.

However, considering such circumstances, the Defendant committed the instant crime of destruction of property and violation of the Road Traffic Act (e.g., refusal of measurement) in spite of the past two times the period of punishment for the instant crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (e.g., the instant crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act) and the instant crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (e.g., the instant crime of destruction of property and the instant violation of the Road Traffic Act (e., refusal of measurement of drinking), although the said judgment was sentenced to a two-year suspended sentence due to embezzlement, etc., on December 24, 2015, even though the Defendant was sentenced to a two-year suspended sentence due to embezzlement, and on December 24, 2015, the instant crime of destruction of property and the instant violation of the Road Traffic Act (e.g., refusal of measurement of drinking), even though the criminal procedure was in progress, and thus, committed the instant crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (e., non-exclusive driving) and the Defendant’s violation of the Road Traffic Act (e., refusal of drinking).

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