2. The lower court rendered a sentence identical to the lower judgment, considering favorable circumstances, such as: (a) the Defendant’s failure to recover the injury to the victims; (b) taking account of the fact that there are many kinds of records or records of crimes; and (c) the extent of damage is not significant; and (d) the equity with the case of being tried at the same time as when the judgment on the first head of the crime became final and conclusive; and (c) the attitude of recognizing and reflecting the mistake was expressed.

In full view of the fact that there is no change of circumstances in the sentencing of the lower court, other than the flexible and unreasonable circumstances taken into account by the lower court, and all other conditions of sentencing, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, background leading to the commission of the offense, means and consequence, scale of the offense, and circumstances after the commission of community service, the lower court’s determination of sentencing cannot be deemed to have exceeded the reasonable bounds of its discretion or to have maintained it as it is unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

3. As such, the defendant's appeal 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.