2. In determining the sentence against the Defendant, the lower court determined that the Defendant, a foreign criminal defendant, entered the Republic of Korea for the purpose of preventing the Defendant from committing the instant crime, thereby taking out cash, which is an object of damage.

The sentence was imposed by comprehensively taking account of various circumstances, such as Defendant’s age, sexual behavior, environment, motive for the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., which are the conditions for sentencing as shown in the record, considering the following: (a) the degree of participation in the crime was not somewhat weak; (b) the number of times of the crime was committed; (c) the amount of damage was large; and (d) the considerable punishment was inevitable due to the failure to recover damage; and (d) the Defendant did not have any power to be punished in the Republic of Korea; and (e) the Defendant’s actual acquisition of the crime was not significant; and (e) the Defendant’s age, sexual behavior, environment, motive for the crime, and circumstances after the crime was committed.

Examining the above sentencing of the lower judgment in full view, the lower court’s determination exceeded the reasonable bounds of its discretion.

There is no change in circumstances that can not be seen as being unfair to maintain the sentencing of the court below in the trial, and it cannot be said that the court below's punishment is unfair because it is too appropriate and too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is not accepted.

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.