2. Comprehensively taking account of the arguments and records of the instant case, the lower court’s sentencing appears to have been determined by fully considering the various grounds for sentencing alleged by the Defendant, including the manner of the instant crime and the degree of damage, the fact that there are many criminal records against the Defendant, but there are no records of punishment for the same kind of crime, and the Defendant did not receive a letter from the victim, and there are no special circumstances to the extent that the sentencing would be changed ex post facto, so the Defendant’

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit.

[However, the determination of whether to issue an employment restriction order for welfare facilities for the disabled pursuant to Article 2 of the Addenda to the Welfare of Disabled Persons Act (Act No. 15904, Dec. 11, 2018) and Article 59-3(1) of the Welfare of Disabled Persons Act should be made. The lower court determined that there are special circumstances that the Defendant may not issue an employment restriction order for welfare facilities for the disabled for the same reason as the reasons revealed while exempting the employment restriction order for children and juveniles-related institutions, etc.