The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of each of the instant crimes, the Defendant was in a state of mental disability or mental disability due to mental illness, such as depression, etc.

B. Each sentence of unfair sentencing (the first judgment of the court below: imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months and 2 months: imprisonment with prison labor for 4 months) of the court below is unfair.

2. Determination

A. As to the consolidated hearing and ex officio reversal, the Defendant appealed each of the first and second and second and the second and several appeals cases. However, due to the previous convictions stated in the first and second original judgments, each of the crimes in the first and second original judgments against the Defendant cannot be adjudicated concurrently, and the separate punishment should be determined separately.

Therefore, since a single sentence is not to be determined in accordance with Article 38 (1) of the Criminal Code, it does not constitute a reason for ex officio destruction.

B. In light of the background, method, and method of each of the instant crimes committed by the lower court based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, and the conduct before and after the commission of each of the instant crimes, even if the Defendant had a mental illness, such as depression, etc. at the time of each of the instant crimes, it cannot be deemed that the Defendant was in a state of having lost or weak ability to discern things

Therefore, the defendant's mental disorder is without merit.

C. The determination of sentencing on the assertion of unfair sentencing is based on the statutory penalty, and the discretionary determination is made within a reasonable and reasonable scope, taking into account the conditions for sentencing as stipulated in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, based on the principle of trial-oriented and directness, and there is an area unique to the first instance court in the determination of sentencing.

In addition to these circumstances and the ex post facto nature of the appellate court, the changes in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court.