2. Determination of the grounds for appeal is the factors for sentencing favorable to the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant recognized his mistake and reflects in depth, and that the defendant was physically disabled and has caused the crime of this case in an economically weak state.

However, considering the fact that the Defendant again committed the instant crime against many victims during the period of repeated crime even though he had been punished several times due to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (the preceding three years of imprisonment with prison labor), the damages have not been recovered at all, and all of the sentencing conditions stated in the instant pleadings, such as the Defendant’s age, background of the crime, means and method of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, the sentence of the lower court, which belongs to the sentencing range set by the Sentencing Commission, is too unreasonable in the absence of any particular change in sentencing grounds after the sentence of the lower judgment.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.