The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. In light of the summary of the grounds for appeal in this case’s sentencing conditions, the lower court’s imprisonment (three months of imprisonment) against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. We examine the following facts: (a) the Defendant recognized each of the instant crimes and against his mistake; and (b) the seizure of damaged articles and the provisional return to the victims are favorable to the Defendant; and (c) if the judgment of the court below is finalized, there are circumstances in which the previous suspended sentence should be imposed together by the imprisonment of six months for which the previous suspended sentence has been invalidated and suspended.

However, even though the defendant was in the period of suspension of execution for the same kind of crime as stated in the judgment of the court below, considering the fact that the defendant committed the crime of this case under several methods similar to the previous crime after the lapse of about two months from the day when the judgment became final and conclusive, and other various sentencing conditions as shown in the records and arguments such as the defendant's age, family environment, and circumstances before and after the crime, it cannot be deemed that the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.