2. It is recognized that the Defendant has no other criminal history except a fine of KRW 700,000,000, imposed for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving) in 2006.

However, in light of the form and method of each of the instant crimes, etc., the punishment of the lower court is too unreasonable, considering the following: (a) the fact that there is no liability for the instant crimes; (b) the failure to recover damage; and (c) the failure to agree with the victims; and (d) there is no change of circumstances that may otherwise determine the age, sex, environment; (b) the motive, means and consequence of each of the instant crimes; and (c) the motive, means and consequence of each of the instant crimes; and (d) the circumstances after the instant crimes, etc., the sentence of the lower court

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. As such, the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit, and is so decided as per Disposition (Article 2-4(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed under the foregoing paragraph (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 200Da36466, Apr. 1, 200). However, “other than the instant case” under Articles 2-1 and 2-4(a) of the Criminal Procedure Act was erroneously added, and it is apparent that the “Article 70 of the Criminal Act” under the “Article 70 of the Criminal Act” was omitted from the “Article