2. There are extenuating circumstances, such as the following: (a) a single studio, the confession of and reflect on the facts constituting an offense; (b) a person who does not cause other injury, such as traffic accidents; and (c) a person who has no criminal record.

On the other hand, the defendant has been punished for the same crime. In particular, in light of the fact that the defendant committed each of the crimes of this case by driving the same vehicle before the period of each of the above probation, it is inevitable to pronounce strict punishment against the defendant, even though the defendant committed each of the crimes of this case by driving the same vehicle before the period of the probation is over three times in 2015.

In addition, considering the overall circumstances, the lower court’s punishment against the Defendant is deemed to have been determined by taking into account various circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, environment, sexual conduct, motive for committing a crime, and circumstances before and after committing a crime, the lower court’s punishment is not deemed to be unfair because it is too unreasonable for the lower court to have imposed punishment.

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