2. The lower court determined that the Defendant’s punishment against each of the Defendant was imposed in consideration of the circumstances favorable to the Defendant, such as the following facts: (a) the Defendant’s act of committing the instant crime, while carrying with himself the excessive amount that the Defendant prepared in advance, and the Defendant did not have any record of criminal punishment; and (b) the fact that it is difficult to view that the Defendant infringed upon the victim’s residence, who is vulnerable to the crime, and forced withdrawal of property; (c) was bad in light of the criminal tool and method, etc.; and (d) the Defendant was unable to obtain use from the victim; and (e) it was difficult to deem that the Defendant made his best efforts to recover from the victim’s damage.

There is no change in circumstances that may vary in the sentencing of the court below even when the court below has reached the trial, and considering all the conditions of sentencing as shown in the instant case, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, etc., it cannot be deemed that the sentence imposed by the court below is too unreasonable

3. Conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed pursuant to Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act.