2. The conclusion that the Defendant recognized the instant crime and agreed with the victim D of the crime of causing property damage and the victim F of the crime of interference with business is favorable.

On the other hand, there is a disadvantage to the Defendant, such as the fact that the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for ten months due to the crime of interference with business, etc., and the Defendant committed the instant crime again during the period of repeated crime, and did not agree with the victim of the crime of injury.

There is no special relationship or change of circumstances that can be newly considered in the trial of the political party, and in full view of various sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments of this case, including the defendant's age, character and conduct, family relationship, circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable.

Defendant’s assertion is not accepted.

3. The defendant's appeal is without merit and thus dismissed pursuant to Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.