2. The lower court determined that: (a) the Defendant was not guilty; (b) the Defendant committed the instant crime during the same repeated period; (c) considering the fact that there was no effort to recover damage; and (d) taking account of equity in the case of concurrent judgments with the crime of injury as indicated in the final judgment; and (b) other factors of sentencing as indicated in the instant records and arguments, including the Defendant’s criminal history, age, sex, environment, motive and means of the crime; and (c) circumstances after the crime.

The reason for the unfair sentencing of the defendant (the fact that the defendant was committed in the instant crime in order to avoid and defend a prior assault, and that the injury was not caused) seems to have been sufficiently considered by the court below in determining the punishment of the defendant, or to have been merely a unilateral argument of the defendant, and the above conditions of the sentencing changed in the court below.

There is no circumstance to see the above sentencing conditions, and considering the above sentencing conditions, the sentence of the court below is determined to be reasonable within the reasonable scope of discretion.

Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.