2. The Defendant committed the instant crime during the period of repeated crime, which was sentenced to one year of imprisonment with prison labor due to larceny, etc. and did not complete the execution of the sentence, and did not agree with the victim. However, there was a fact that there was a letter submitted to this court to the effect that “the Defendant is disturbing the Defendant’s wife” in the name of the victim for the first time during the trial.

The defendant is disadvantageous to the defendant.

However, the circumstances favorable to the defendant include the fact that the defendant is recognized as committing his crime, the fact that the defendant seems to have reached the crime of this case due to difficulties in living, the amount of damage, and the fact that the damaged goods have been returned to the victim, etc.

In addition, taking into account the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, health conditions, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence, etc., various factors of sentencing revealed in the proceedings of the instant case, such as the circumstances after the crime, the scope of the recommended sentencing guidelines for the enactment of the Sentencing Committee / [the scope of recommended punishment / [the scope of recommended punishment / [the scope of punishment between 1 and 6 months and 3 years] basic area (the scope of recommended punishment], and opinions on the sentencing presented by the jury at the lower court that was proceeded with a citizen participation trial, the lower court’s sentencing was too excessive and exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

It does not seem that it does not appear.

Therefore, the defendant's argument of sentencing is without merit.

3. The appeal by the defendant is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal by the defendant is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.