2. The lower court rendered a sentence within the scope of the sentencing guidelines in consideration of the circumstances favorable to the following: (a) the offender committed a second offense during the period of the same suspended sentence; (b) the same criminal record was committed several times; (c) the confession and cooperation in the investigation was made; and (d) some victims (crime Nos. 3 and 4) do not want punishment; and (d) the environment for the poor growth.

The appellate court, compared to the first instance court, has no change in the conditions of sentencing, and the first instance sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect the first instance sentencing judgment.

Unlike others, the sentencing conditions mentioned above have been changed in the trial of the party.

There is no reason to see the above sentencing, and when comprehensively considering the above sentencing, 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.