The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentencing of the lower court (ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The judgment of the court below on the grounds of appeal was based on the sentencing that the defendant committed several offenses under the law identical to the instant case even before the instant crime was committed, and thus, it is difficult to confirm that the defendant had such power prior to the instant crime, as pointed out by the defense counsel.

In addition, it is also true that there are favorable circumstances such as the fact that the defendant is merely an intermediate romoer and there is almost little illegal benefits that have been finally reverted to the defendant in relation to this case, that the defendant was present at the investigative agency at the end of the escape of several months, and that all of his crimes are recognized, and that there is no criminal record of punishment after the defendant was sentenced in 190, and that the defendant is a wife that must support his wife and his wife.

However, the Defendant received a large amount of money under the pretext of informing the executives and employees of pseudo Petroleum Control Information, and the said money is delivered to the Institute through D, which is a total book of Bracker, thereby significantly damaging the public trust in the pseudo Petroleum Control Business, which is a large amount of crime liability.

In addition, even before the instant case, even though the Defendant had been sentenced two times or more in 2001 and 2006 as a crime related to pseudo petroleum, the Defendant is highly likely to be subject to criticism by putting the crimes related to pseudo petroleum. In full view of all other circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, intelligence and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is without merit and Article 364 of the Criminal Procedure Act is not reasonable.