2. Determination: (a) there are favorable reasons for sentencing, such as the fact that the defendant led to the confession of the crime and is against the defendant; (b) however, the punishment was imposed more than 10 times for violence and intimidation; (c) three times for which the suspension of the execution of imprisonment was sentenced; (d) three months after the suspension of the execution of imprisonment became final and conclusive for violent crime; and (e) three months and five months for which the execution of the sentence was completed; and (e) the defendant committed a repeated offense by committing each of the instant crimes; and (e) the reasons for the unfavorable sentencing, such as the defendant’s age, family relation, economic situation, circumstances leading to the crime, motive and motive leading to the crime; and (e) all of the other matters concerning the sentencing as indicated in the records and changes in the instant case, the judgment of the court below is deemed appropriate; and (e) there is no change in circumstances to be considered in the trial, the defendant’

3. In conclusion, the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition (Article 364(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with the above provision (Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure). However, the lower court’s application of the aforementioned Act on the addition of “1. Selection of punishment: Obstruction of Interference with Official Duties, Special Property Destruction, and Special Intimidation,” and “an aggravated aggravation of repeated offense