The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor for ten months) of the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). All of the criminal acts committed by a criminal defendant are favorable circumstances, such as the fact that the criminal defendant is aware of all his/her own criminal acts, and that the amount acquired by the criminal defendant is not large.

However, there have been many victims who are vulnerable to the crime such as satisfying, etc., and the defendant has already been punished several times due to the crime of the same veterinary act, and in particular, it seems that the risk of recidivism is significantly high because they committed each of the crimes of this case without being aware of the fact that they had been committed during the period of repeated crime due to the same criminal act, the victims have suffered considerable mental suffering as well as economic damage, and even if they have suffered considerable mental suffering, it is disadvantageous to the victim.

The court below determined the punishment in consideration of all the above circumstances, and there is no change in the sentencing conditions that may be particularly considered in the trial.

In addition, comprehensively taking into account the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, and all of the sentencing conditions indicated in the records and arguments, such as the circumstances after the crime, the sentencing of the lower court, which sentenced a minor sentence than the lower limit of the recommended sentence (one year) set in the sentencing guidelines, cannot be said to be excessively excessive beyond the reasonable scope of discretion.

The defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is not accepted.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act because the defendant's appeal is without merit.