The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The costs of lawsuit by the court below shall be borne by the defendant.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the punishment prescribed by the court of the original instance (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The judgment of the defendant was made for the first time, and all of the crimes were led to confessions and reflects, and there is no criminal record for the same kind of crime, and family members want to be.

However, the criminal liability of the defendant is not against the law.

There are several criminal records.

The court of the court below rendered the sentence against the defendant by taking account of the aforementioned various positive and negative circumstances.

The judgment below

There is no new circumstance that can be considered in sentencing as a result of the sentence.

The defendant's deposit to F shall not be considered for any reason.

In addition, in full view of various sentencing conditions stipulated in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive, means, and consequence of the commission of the crime, the circumstances before and after the commission of the crime, the lower court’s sentence is not deemed unfair.

3. As such, the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit.

In addition, according to Articles 191(1), 190(1), and 186(1) main text of the Criminal Procedure Act, it is reasonable for a defendant to bear the costs of lawsuit in the original judgment (in the case of witness expenses). If an appeal is dismissed against the original judgment that did not state any information on the order and reasons as to the bearing of the costs of lawsuit, the appellate court may decide whether to bear the costs of lawsuit together with the costs of lawsuit in the first instance, and the burden of the costs of lawsuit is not subject to the principle of prohibition of disadvantageous alteration under Article 368 of the Criminal Procedure Act (see Supreme Court Decision 200Do12840, Dec. 24, 2009).