The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the reasons for appeal (six months of imprisonment) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the judgment of the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). The lower court determined the sentence against the Defendant by taking into account the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant had a history of having been punished several times for the same kind of crime and a different kind of crime; (b) the Defendant committed each of the instant crimes during the repeated crime period in which the execution of the sentence has not yet been completed due to the same kind of crime; and (c) the extent of damage was not significant; and (d) there is no special circumstance or change of circumstances to change the sentence of the lower court in the trial; and (e) taking into account all other circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court is unreasonable because it is too unreasonable to avoid the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since the defendant's appeal is without merit.