2. Although the Defendant appears to have an attitude to mislead and reflect his mistake, the instant crime was committed in a way that would avoid disturbance, such as threatening the victim, who is an employee of marina, by carrying the excessive amount of goods dangerous to the Defendant, threatening the victim, who is an employee of marina, and taking the items displayed in the said way, and thus, the relevant crime is not less complicated.

In addition, the defendant has not agreed with the victim until now or has not taken measures to recover from damage.

In addition, the defendant has been sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for two or more times in the past, or for special intimidation (4 months of imprisonment with prison labor and eight months of imprisonment), and the crime of this case constitutes a repeated crime.

Considering the above circumstances favorable to or unfavorable to the defendant, and the age, character and conduct, environment, and all other conditions of sentencing as shown in the argument of this case, the sentence imposed by the court below cannot be deemed as being too heavy or unreasonable because it is within the proper scope of sentencing discretion.

Therefore, the above assertion by both parties is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, since all of the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor are without merit. It is