2. Determination

A. According to the records, the court below determined punishment within the scope of the recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines set by the Supreme Court sentencing committee, taking into account the following factors: (a) the nature of the crime is inferior in light of the process, method, etc. of the crime; (b) the frequency of the crime is extremely high and the amount of damage is considerably high; (c) the recovery of damage is not proper; (d) the records of punishment for the same kind of crime are several times; and (e) the same type of crime is committed when the crime is committed during the period of repeated crime; (d) the mistake is divided and contradictory; and

B. Although there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the original judgment because a new sentencing data has not been submitted in the trial at the original court, and considering various reasons for sentencing revealed in the oral proceedings, the lower court’s sentencing was too excessive and exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

It does not appear.

(c)

Therefore, the argument of sentencing 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.