2. In full view of the favorable circumstances, such as the fact that the Defendant recognized the instant crime and reflects the fact that the instant crime may have been tried simultaneously with the crime of larceny for which judgment became final and conclusive, but the Defendant committed again the instant crime despite having been committed several times of punishment for the same kind of crime; the Defendant recovered from damage caused by the instant crime or failed to agree with the victim; the Defendant did not change any special circumstances or circumstances that may be newly considered in sentencing after the sentence of the lower judgment; and other circumstances, including the amount of damage, Defendant’s character and behavior, environment, motive and means of the instant crime; and the motive and means of the instant crime; and the consequence thereof, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court against the Defendant is deemed to be adequate.

Therefore, the defendant's argument of sentencing 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 it is so decided as per Disposition (Article 25(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that “total amount of KRW 220 million” in the facts constituting the crime of the lower judgment is obviously a clerical error of “total amount of KRW 220,00,000.”