The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

1. The summary of the reasons for appeal (six months of imprisonment) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. In full view of various circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and circumstance leading to the instant crime, and circumstance before and after the instant crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is somewhat unreasonable, by taking account of the following factors: (a) even though the Defendant committed the instant crime even though he/she was sentenced to six months of imprisonment for fraud at the District Court on March 25, 2014 and completed the enforcement of the said sentence on August 6, 2014, when he/she committed the instant crime; (b) the Defendant recognized the instant crime; (c) the Defendant reflects his/her mistake; (d) the damage in the event of property damage is minor; (e) the Defendant did not want the Defendant’s punishment by mutual consent with the victim; and (e) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, background and circumstance leading to the instant crime;

3. Accordingly, according to the conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is again decided as follows.

[Discied Judgment] The facts constituting an offense and the summary of evidence recognized by the court are identical to the facts stated in the corresponding column of the judgment below. Thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 366 of the Criminal Act, and Article 366 of the Criminal Act, the choice of imprisonment for a crime;

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act among repeated crimes;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;