The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable in its summary of the grounds for appeal.

2. In light of the following facts: (a) the Defendant’s depth of and reflects the Defendant’s criminal act; (b) there has been no history of criminal punishment exceeding the fine so far; and (c) the extent of each damage is relatively minor, etc. However, considering the circumstance and motive leading to each of the instant crimes; (b) the background and motive leading up to each of the instant crimes; (c) the victims are the persons engaged in their occupation and business in the vicinity of the Defendant’s dwelling; (d) the Defendant requested a detention warrant on some of the instant crimes on September 12, 2012; and (e) even after dismissal and release, it is necessary to isolate the Defendant who repeated the instant crimes continuously similar to the instant crimes from society for a considerable period; and (e) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, and environment, etc., the Defendant’s punishment is too unreasonable, and thus, the Defendant’s assertion of unreasonable sentencing is not reasonable.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.