2. The judgment of the defendant recognized the crime, and his depth is divided, and the investigative agency revoked the complaint of this case.

D is the female and female of the defendant, and E is a replacement of the defendant, and the defendant has caused a dispute over inherited property between D and E, which led to the crime of this case, and there are circumstances to consider the circumstances of the crime.

The defendant is aged 74 years of age and is making it difficult for him to live with the money that he gets.

However, around 1965, there was a record of being punished for a suspended sentence due to the charge of forging private documents around 1976, and there was a record of being punished for a crime of bodily injury around 2003.

Criminal conduct like this case is not only a crime that interferes with the proper exercise of the state's penal authority or disciplinary authority, but also an individual who seeks not only to be punished but also a crime that leads to the suffering and danger of unfair criminal punishment or disciplinary action, and the quality of the crime is not easy.

In addition, considering the character, character, environment, etc. of the defendant and all the sentencing conditions shown in the arguments, the sentence imposed by the court below cannot be deemed unfair because it is too unreasonable.

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.