The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal (the imprisonment of six months, the suspension of execution of two years, the observation of protection) is too unreasonable.

2. On November 1, 2016, the court below rendered a decision after the defendant puts the presiding judge's seal in the column for the refusal of the request for the appointment of the national defense counsel, which was sent by the defendant on the right side of the national defense counsel, and making a written decision on this matter or closing the pleadings by conducting a hearing without oral notice at the trial date. The court below's failure to make a decision on the above request by the defendant is illegal, but the defendant did not give any explanation as to the grounds for which it is impossible to appoint a defense counsel, and on records, the defendant was unable to appoint a defense counsel due to poverty or any other reason.

Since there is no evidence to determine the person, the defendant's request for the appointment of a defense counsel by the above party party of the defendant cannot be justified, and such illegality affected the conclusion of the judgment.

It cannot be seen (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Do6498, Nov. 10, 2005). It is recognized that the Defendant recognized the instant crime and reflects the Defendant, and that the Defendant has no record of criminal punishment.

However, the crime of this case, without being registered with the competent authority over about 11 months, is operated with the word "marb" and arranged female employees to provide entertainment guidance, and the quality of the crime is not weak; there is no change in circumstances that could change the punishment of the court below; and in full view of all other factors of sentencing as indicated in the records and changes theory, such as the defendant's age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence leading to the crime of this case, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable.

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.