2. The following facts are favorable to the Defendant: (a) the Defendant, while participating in a dispute between the victims and the horses, committed a contingent crime; (b) the Defendant recognized all the crimes of this case; and (c) reflects the mistake; and (d) the first offender who has no record of criminal punishment in addition to the juvenile protective disposition given several times due to the crimes of this species, etc.

However, in light of the method and form of the crime, such as threatening a minor who is a dangerous object to victims, the defendant seems to have not made any effort to recover the damage, but the defendant did not make any effort to recover the damage, and the fact that the defendant did not agree with the victims is disadvantageous to the defendant.

In full view of the above circumstances and the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence, there are no special changes in circumstances that make the original judgment and the punishment different from the original judgment, such as the circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment cannot be deemed unfair merely because it is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's above 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.