2. The lower court sentenced the above punishment by taking account of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant’s mistake is divided; (b) the victim is not punishable; and (c) the Defendant has no record of punishment other than the fine; and (d) the Defendant has been sentenced to the above punishment.

In addition to the circumstances considered by the court below, the defendant uses dangerous wooden material storages, which are dangerous articles, and the defendant commits the crime shall be considered disadvantageously.

In full view of the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, health, circumstances leading to the commission of a crime, means and result, scale of a crime and circumstances after a crime, etc., which can be known through records and pleadings, the sentence sentenced by the lower court appears to be reasonable, and the lower court’s sentencing judgment exceeded the reasonable bounds of discretion.

There is no circumstance that the assessment or maintenance thereof is deemed unfair (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). Therefore, it is difficult to deem that the sentence imposed by the lower court is unfair because it is too unreasonable as the Defendant alleged.

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.