2. In full view of all the favorable circumstances (the total amount of confession and theft is 445,00,000, and 200,000,000, out of the damaged goods No. 4 of the crime list No. 4 of the attached Table of the judgment of the court below) and unfavorable conditions (the victim E) as stated in the reasoning of sentencing, including the Defendant’s age character and character, intelligence environment, motive and means of crime, result of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentencing judgment of the court below exceeded the reasonable limit of discretion.

There is no circumstance that the assessment or maintenance thereof is deemed unfair (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). Therefore, the lower court’s sentencing is appropriate, and the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

3. As such, the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition by the court below (Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, however, the Defendant’s appeal is ex officio pursuant to Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, which is omitted due to mistake on the “an aggravated punishment of 1. concurrent crimes” in the application of the judgment of the court below