The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the records, the crime of causing property damage in the judgment of Seoul Southern District Court 2012 High-Ma3046, the crime of assault in the judgment of the Seoul Southern District Court 2013 High-Ma1293, the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties in the judgment of the Seoul Northern District Court 2013 High-Ma1293, the crime of fraud and injury in the judgment of the Seoul Northern District Court 2013 High-Ma335, 721 (Joint) No. 5 or 10, and the crime of assault and injury in the judgment of the Seoul Northern District Court 2013 High-Ma3046, the crime of assault in the judgment of the Supreme Court 2013 High-Ma1293, and the crime of fraud and injury in the judgment of the Supreme Court 2013 High-Ma335, 721

Therefore, it is just that the court below set a separate punishment for each crime by applying Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act and sentenced three punishment for the defendant. There is no error of law by misunderstanding the legal principles on the punishment of concurrent crimes.

Meanwhile, examining the reasoning of the judgment below in light of the records, it is difficult to view that the defendant was in a state of mental disorder at the time of committing the crime of this case, and there is no error of incomplete deliberation in the court below'

The argument that the defendant's injury to P constitutes a justifiable act among the grounds of appeal is raised only when the defendant saw it as a ground of appeal or when the court below did not consider it as a subject of judgment ex officio, and it does not constitute a legitimate ground of appeal.

In addition, the argument that the judgment of the court below erred in incomplete deliberation on the sentencing conditions is the argument of unfair sentencing. According to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in the case where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years is imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed, and thus, a more minor sentence