The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (five months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The fact that the Defendant paid the amount of damage to the lessee as the deposit for the lease of the former lessee, and that the first offender is favorable to the Defendant.

However, the defendant did not notify the victim of the fact that the amount of the lease deposit which is fixed and conclusive as stated in the facts constituting the crime and the auction can be commenced in the studio through a certified broker F, which led to the failure to close the error, and the fact that the damage has not been recovered is disadvantageous to the defendant.

In addition, in full view of the various circumstances shown in the records and arguments of this case, such as the defendant's age, sex, environment, family relation, motive, background, means and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the court below is appropriate and the sentencing judgment by the court below exceeded the reasonable limit of discretion.

There are no circumstances such as evaluation or maintenance of it is deemed unfair.

Therefore, since the sentence imposed by the court below is too unreasonable, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

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