2. The circumstances should be favorable or taken into account to the defendant, such as the fact that the damaged goods are in kind in 2A of tobacco, the victim does not want to be punished against the defendant, and the fact that the defendant recognized the crime and repents the wrong facts.

However, in light of the specific contents of the crime, method of committing the crime, deadly weapons used, etc., the criminal liability of the defendant is not less complicated. In addition, given that the defendant was sentenced in 2010 to imprisonment for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes and committed the crime in this case during the repeated crime period, the defendant's punishment is too unreasonable compared to the degree of the defendant's responsibility, considering the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, all of the sentencing conditions in this case including the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the result of the application of the sentencing guidelines by the Sentencing Commission of the Supreme Court, even though considering the circumstances of the defendant's internal sentencing, the sentence of the court below, which determined the maximum punishment of the law penalty

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 since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.