The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds of appeal was that the Defendant recognized the instant crime from the prosecution, and there was no other way to resolve the livelihood by dismissal at the accompanying workplace, and thus, the Defendant had no choice but to block the instant crime. The amount of damage was relatively small, and agreed with the victim.

In light of this, the punishment sentenced by the court below (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The fact that the defendant recognized his mistake and the victim expressed his intention not to be punished against the defendant is favorable to the defendant.

On the other hand, the fact that the Defendant committed the instant crime even though he/she had been punished for the same kind of crime, including the record of having been sentenced to imprisonment twice, and was punished for the same crime, is disadvantageous.

In addition to these circumstances, comprehensively taking account of the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and consequence of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment seems to be excessively unreasonable. Thus, the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.