2. The fact that the defendant recognized his mistake and reflected his mistake, and that the amount of damage to the crime of causing property damage is not so significant is favorable to the defendant.

However, in light of the fact that the Defendant was punished several times as well as the suspension of the execution of imprisonment with prison labor due to the crime related to narcotics, in particular, the Defendant administered phiphones and marijuana in the repeated crime period due to the crime related to narcotics, possessed phiphones and marijuana, damaged the victim’s property by investing in the telephones, and assaulted the victim’s property by driving a motor vehicle, which is an object dangerous to the victim, and the license was revoked in 2014, and the crime is not very good; the Defendant did not recover from damage to the victim and did not agree with the victim; the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and other various circumstances that are the conditions for sentencing, such as the circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s sentence 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 ground that it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.