2. The judgment that the defendant recognized the crime of this case and reflects the fact that the degree of injury caused by the crime of this case is relatively not more severe, and that the defendant committed a contingent crime while driving with the victim and vagabonds is favorable to the defendant.

However, the fact that the defendant did not agree with the victim, there was a record of criminal punishment several times including violence, and that the defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment on June 12, 2014 by obstructing the execution of public duties by the Ulsan District Court, which became final and conclusive on December 6 of the same year. The fact that the court below seems to have determined the punishment in consideration of the equity between the crime for which the above judgment became final and the crime of this case were adjudicated simultaneously with the crime of this case, and other various circumstances, including the defendant's age, sex, sex, environment, family relationship, motive and circumstance of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, and the sentencing conditions as shown in the trial process, are considered to be excessive and unfair. 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.