All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (two months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and one hundred and twenty hours of community service) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B did not submit the grounds of appeal within the statutory period.

2. Determination

A. It is recognized that Defendant A’s appellate judgment appears to have committed the instant crime by willful negligence, and that the Defendant partially restored the victim’s damage (3.5 million won).

However, the Defendant acquired most of the proceeds from the crime (13 million won) and consumed them, and did not agree with the victim so that it would be reasonable.

The defendant has a past record of the suspension of the execution of imprisonment with prison labor, including the previous record of the suspension of the execution of imprisonment.

There is no special change in circumstances that would be different from the original judgment in the trial.

In full view of the above circumstances and the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive, background, means and consequence of the crime, etc., various sentencing conditions as shown in the instant pleadings, including the circumstances after the crime was committed, and the scope of recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines set by the Supreme Court sentencing committee, the lower court’s sentence cannot be deemed to be too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

B. On February 19, 2016, the Defendant filed an appeal against the lower judgment on February 19, 2016, and received a written notice of the receipt of the trial record from the lower court on April 19, 2016, the Defendant did not submit the statement of grounds for appeal within 20 days, which is the lawful period for filing the petition of grounds for appeal. The petition of appeal does not state the grounds for appeal (However, the Defendant was present on the second trial date, and stated that the grounds for appeal was misunderstanding legal principles and unreasonable sentencing). No reason for ex officio examination on the record

Therefore, the defendant's appeal should be dismissed in accordance with Article 361-4 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

3. Conclusion.