The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. In light of the following: (a) efforts are made to agree with victims of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing); (b) living conditions are not good; (c) the commission of the instant crime; (d) health is not good; and (e) the sentence imposed by the lower court (two years of imprisonment and of confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. In full view of ① favorable circumstances, the lower court sentenced the sentence, i.e., the confession of the instant crime, the number of the instant crimes, the method of the commission of the crimes, and the amount of the damages, based on the following: (i) the commission of the instant crimes; and (ii) the commission of the crime is not good in light of the frequency of the instant crimes; and (iii) the commission of the recovery of

In full view of the above circumstances and other arguments and records, the sentencing of the lower court seems to have been appropriately determined by fully considering the various sentencing grounds.

Meanwhile, there appears to be circumstances where the Defendant is trying to compensate for the victims even if part of the victims' injury was inflicted upon the party. However, in light of the fact that the Defendant had been sentenced to imprisonment for eight months or one year and four months for the same crime as the instant case, and that the Defendant committed the instant crime again at the end of two months, even if considering the aforementioned additional circumstances, it does not appear that the lower court’s punishment is changed to the extent that it would be changed.

Ultimately, the defendant's argument that the above sentencing is unfair is groundless and thus is not accepted.

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.