2. The circumstances favorable to the Defendant include: (a) the Defendant recognized the instant crime and against the mistake; (b) the victim did not want the punishment of the Defendant in agreement with the victim; and (c) the Defendant’s family members wished to the Defendant’s prior wife.

On the other hand, the crime of this case was committed by the defendant, which caused a dispute with the victim, and caused an injury of 4 weeks prior to the victim's non-discriminatory consideration by taking the victim's bend on the rooftop of the new wall 3 city row house and by opening and intrusioning the victim's benda, and causing an injury of 4 weeks prior to the victim's non-discriminatory consideration. The crime of this case has significant nature of the crime; there was a history of criminal punishment for the same crime even before the crime of this case; and send text messages containing a threat to the victim and his family members

The fact that mental suffering was inflicted on the defendant is disadvantageous to the defendant.

In full view of the above circumstances and other factors of sentencing, including the background of the instant crime, the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, and environment, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable as it is too unreasonable, and thus, 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 on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.