2. The judgment of the defendant reflects the wrong and again does not commit the same crime.

Although the defendant did not know of the same kind of crime on July 20, 2016 and committed the crime of this case thereafter, the victim's mental impulse seems to be considerable, and the victim did not receive a letter from the injured party, and other various sentencing conditions as shown in the arguments and records, such as the defendant's age, sex, environment, circumstance and result of the crime, it cannot be deemed that the sentence imposed by the court below is too unreasonable.

3. Accordingly, the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is groundless.