2. The judgment of unfair sentencing refers to the case where the sentence of the judgment of the court below is too heavy or too minor in light of the content of the specific case.

Based on the statutory penalty, the sentencing is a discretionary judgment that takes place within a reasonable and appropriate scope by comprehensively taking into account the conditions of the sentencing prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act based on the statutory penalty, and there is a unique area of the first instance court in our Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the direct principle.

In addition to these circumstances and the ex post facto nature of the appellate court, if there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court is not beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(2) In light of the aforementioned circumstances and circumstances, the lower court determined that the Defendant was guilty of a repeated crime during the period of repeated crime, and that the Defendant’s mistake was not recovered, and that there was no special circumstance or change of circumstances that may be considered in sentencing newly in the trial. In full view of all the factors of sentencing indicated in the instant records and arguments, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family relation, motive and background of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s sentencing cannot be deemed to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, and thus, it cannot be deemed that the lower court’s sentencing was too excessive.

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.