2. However, the fact that the defendant led to the confession of each of the crimes in this case, and shows an attitude to reflect his mistake, and at the stage of the original trial, the fact that the victim paid 3 million won under the name of compensation for damage and expressed an intention that the victim does not want the punishment of the defendant shall be considered as favorable to the defendant.

However, the crime of violation of the Punishment of Violence, etc. Act (a collective injury with a deadly weapon, etc.) among each of the crimes of this case is that knife with a knife for oral repair, which is a dangerous object, caused the chest of the victim to conduct a serious snife on the left chest part of the victim's left chest, and its quality is very poor. The defendant committed each of the crimes of this case again in two to four months after the execution of the final sentence was completed even though he had been sentenced several times of punishment before the crime of this case, even though he had been sentenced several times of crime of the same kind of violence before the crime of this case, again committed each of the crimes of this case. The victim committed 12 years more than the defendant or more, as the defendant was tried by the defendant after the release of the defendant, and committed the crime of this case, there are various kinds of sentencing conditions as shown in the records, such as the defendant's age, character and behavior, and environment, and the scope of recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines of the Sentencing Committee (2.).

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

3. The appeal by the defendant 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.