2. It is advantageous to the fact that all of the judgment crimes are recognized and reflected, that an agreement has been made with some victims, and that equity should be taken into account with the case where the first head of the crime committed in the judgment below, which is a single concurrent crime after Article 37 of the Criminal Act, concurrently with the case where the judgment is rendered.

However, the lower court appears to have determined the punishment in light of the favorable circumstances, and there is no change of circumstances that may be considered in the new sentencing after the sentence of the lower judgment, and the Defendant is likely to be subject to criticism because many small-scale merchants repeatedly commit the crime, and other circumstances that form the conditions for the sentencing specified in the instant case, including the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, family relationship, and circumstances after the crime, it is difficult to view that the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable because it is too unreasonable.

Therefore, we do not accept the above argument of the defendant's above sentencing.

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.