2. In full view of the circumstances that the court below rendered on the grounds of sentencing and all the sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments of this case, it is deemed that the sentence imposed by the court below is appropriate and too unreasonable, and it does not seem unfair. Although the defendant led to the conviction of a part of the crime that the defendant denied at the court below, it is difficult to see that such circumstance constitutes the sentencing ground to the extent that the sentence of the court below would be mitigated.

Therefore, the defendant's argument that the above sentencing is unfair is without merit.

3. As such, the Defendant’s appeal is without merit and is dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by the court below (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Da36440, Apr. 29, 2016). However, since it is apparent that the Defendant’s appeal is a clerical error in the facts constituting the crime of the lower court’s judgment, “the date on which April 29, 2016.”