The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

1. The decision of the court below on the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable that the sentence of 10 months sentenced by the defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Each of the crimes of this case is determined as follows: (a) for about 70 days, the Defendant intruded the victim’s office at night, stolen or stolen things at night; (b) had access to the game site three times or more by using an opportunity to intrude into the said office; and (c) had purchased the said office phone number in total by entering the said office number into the settlement number; and (d) had not used computers three times or more, and did not pay the service fee; (b) the nature of the crime is inferior in light of the frequency of the crime or the circumstances leading up to the crime; (c) the Defendant repeatedly intruded into the same office for at least two hours; and (d) had no more than two times, such as by viewing the screen image with a computer; and (d) the Defendant had been repeatedly committed to commit the crime of this case, and (e) had no more than two times been found to have been subject to punishment by the victim, and (e) had no more than two times the victim’s motive to commit the crime of larceny.

However, in full view of the following: (a) the Defendant’s recognition of the instant crime; (b) is against the Defendant’s health; (c) is not good; (d) is economically difficult; (c) the amount of damage from each of the instant crimes is not so large; (d) there was no record of criminal punishment since 2009; and (e) other circumstances that form the conditions for sentencing indicated in the record, such as the Defendant’s age, environment, occupation, family relationship; and (e) circumstances before and after the instant crime, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.