2. Determination

A. It is recognized that the Defendant led to the confession of the instant crime and reflects on the Defendant, that the Defendant paid KRW 10 million to the victim for the recovery of damage, that the victim did not want the punishment of the Defendant in agreement with the victim, that the Defendant is receiving mental treatment, and that the circumstances of home are not good.

B. However, in full view of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant again committed the instant crime during the period of repeated crime due to the crime under the same Act; and (b) the instant crime committed against the victim whose employment was imminent due to economic difficulties, taking advantage of his/her position against the victim whose employment was imminent; and (c) the nature of the instant crime is very bad; and (d) the Defendant’s age, details of the crime, and circumstances surrounding the sentencing conditions specified in the instant pleadings, such as the circumstances after the crime committed, even if considering the favorable circumstances of the Defendant, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's above 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.