The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The Defendant appealed for the reason that the sentence of the lower court (the imprisonment of eight months for each crime set forth in the holding and the imprisonment of three months for each crime set forth in the holding and the ruling No. 2) is too unreasonable.

However, in light of all the sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments of this case including the fact that there are a number of criminal records of the defendant with the same kind of crime, and in the case of the crimes in Article 1 of the holding, the defendant is recognized and against all of the crimes in this case, and the case of each crime in Article 2 of the holding constitutes concurrent crimes in the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, even though it is considered that the sentence imposed by the court below for the reasons as stated in its holding is too unreasonable.

Since the appeal by the defendant is groundless, it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.

However, pursuant to Article 25 (1) of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure, the phrase “M” in the fourth 7th sentence of the judgment of the court below shall be corrected ex officio as “Y”.