The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment) on the gist of the grounds of appeal is too unreasonable.

2. It is recognized that the judgment of the defendant is divided into his mistake, there is no criminal history heavier than the fine, and there is an agreement with some victims and partial recovery of damage.

However, in light of the fact that the Defendant has been punished several times for the same crime, the nature of the crime is very rough and bad in view of the form, method, frequency, etc. of each of the crimes in this case, and there is no change of circumstances to determine different from the original judgment at the time of the trial, and considering the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime in this case, the motive, means and consequence of the crime in this case, and the scope of the recommended sentencing guidelines for the enactment of the sentencing guidelines by the Supreme Court, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. As such, the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition (Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed under the judgment of the court below (Article 25(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that the “victim AB” of the Defendant’s failure to commit a crime is a clerical error in the “victim CN,” and the applicable statute is obvious that “(the remainder of each crime except for theft of intrusion by each night room at each time)” was erroneously changed following the “decision of imprisonment” of each sentence’s choice. Therefore, it is corrected that ex officio correction and addition are made under Article 25(1) of the Rules on the Criminal Procedure.