The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the lower court’s punishment (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The fact that the Defendant recognized all of the instant crimes and reflected, etc. is favorable to the Defendant.

However, even though the Defendant had been punished several times for the same crime (a fine of up to nine times due to interference with duties and imprisonment), the Defendant committed the instant crime again during the period of repeated crime due to the same crime, the Defendant’s repeated crime committed by the Defendant who interfered with his/her business by finding his/her neighboring store while drinking, and did not take any particular measures to recover damage until the appellate court, is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

In full view of all the conditions of sentencing as shown in the records and arguments of this case, including these circumstances, the sentence imposed by the court below was judged appropriate and exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion because it is too unreasonable.

subsection (b) of this section.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

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.