2. The circumstances are favorable to the fact that the defendant recognized the instant crime and reflected in the determination, that the defendant appears to have committed the instant crime in a state of mental anxiety, and that there is a family member to support the instant crime.

However, the crime of this case contains inflammable substances in plastic containers, and then dumps them into the body of the defendant and the earth's bottom.

The fact that the police officer prepared for the purpose of putting a fire on the district belt, which is the current building, by threatening the police officer, and obstructed the performance of duties by the police officer, and the nature of the crime is very high, the risk of the crime is likely to be high, the crime of this case was committed during the suspension period of execution due to the same crime, and the fact that the crime of this case was committed during the suspension period of execution due to the same crime, and the fact that there was a history of punishment (criminal, penalty, and penalty) several times due to

In full view of the above circumstances and the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence, there is no special change in circumstances that make the sentence different from the original court’s sentencing conditions indicated in the records of this case, such as the circumstances after the crime, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.

Therefore, 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.