The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the court below's imprisonment (one year and two months) is too unreasonable; and

2. The judgment of the Defendant appears to be against his own will while attempting to commit all crimes, and the fact that the means and methods of each of the instant crimes do not seem to be very poor, and that the total amount of damage does not seem to be high, is favorable.

However, it is reasonable to respect the Defendant’s crime of the same kind committed repeatedly during the period of repeated crime, the victims’ damage has not been recovered at all due to the crime of the same kind. Meanwhile, if the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion (see Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In light of the following, the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, criminal records, and circumstances before and after the crime, etc., the Defendant did not reveal any special circumstances to the extent that the punishment would be changed ex post facto, and the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, criminal records, and circumstances before and after the crime, it cannot be deemed unfair for the lower court to have excessively exceeded the reasonable scope

The defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, since there is no reason for the appeal of the defendant (Provided, That it is obvious that it is a clerical error in accordance with Article 25 of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure, and it is corrected ex officio to delete "the proviso of Article 42" in Part 14 of