The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the sentence of one year and six months sentenced by the court below is too unreasonable.

2. It is recognized that all of the crimes of this case are recognized by the defendant, and that the defendant alone supports children who need to receive a regular video treatment by divorce with his wife, and that each of the crimes of this case is in concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act with regard to concurrent crimes under Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, such as violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a violation of the Act on the Punishment of Violences, etc. (a group, a deadly weapon, etc.) as stated in the facts constituting the crime of this case for which the

However, each of the crimes of this case was committed by the defendant against C while the defendant instigated the larceny, acquired the stolen mobile phone equipment by assaulting or harming wife C, by deceiving the victim T which had maintained a pet relationship before divorce with wife, and by deceiving the victim T which had been in force prior to divorce with wife, even if there were such circumstances as alleged by the defendant, each of the crimes of this case is not easy, and the nature of the crime is very poor, and in particular, the defendant began to commit each of the crimes of this case during the repeated crime period, and even during the repeated crime period, even though he was tried on the crime of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a crime of violence, deadly weapons, etc.) as indicated in the facts of the crime of this case, even if he did not agree with the victims about the crime of this case, and even if he did not reach an agreement with the victim on the record, and there was no other evidence to recognize that the defendant had made an endeavor to reach an agreement on the records, including the age of the defendant's occupation, theft, and other criminal records.