2. Although the Defendant appears to have recognized and reflected all of the instant crimes, the Defendant cannot be deemed to have committed each of the instant crimes of the same kind repeatedly during the period of repeated crime, even though he had been punished in 2006, 2009 and 2011 due to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, considering the motive and circumstances leading up to the instant crime, the circumstances after the instant crime, the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, and environment, and the various circumstances, which are the conditions for sentencing as indicated in the instant records and arguments, such as the following: (a) the Defendant committed the instant crime; and (b) the Defendant committed the same type of crime repeatedly during the period of repeated crime; and (c) the

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.