2. Determination is based on the circumstances favorable to the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant shows an attitude to recognize and reflect his/her mistake, and that some of the circumstances can be considered in the living environment of the defendant.

However, even though the Defendant was punished for the same kind of crime, it appears that the Defendant went to the instant crime without opening, and that the distance of the Defendant’s driving was not short, etc., are disadvantageous to the Defendant. In full view of the circumstances unfavorable to the Defendant, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, and environment, and all the sentencing conditions specified in the instant argument, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, the lower court’s punishment cannot be deemed unreasonable

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, 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.

(However, since Article 53 and Article 55 (1) 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act is apparent that "Article 55 (1) 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act for Discretionary Mitigation of 1." in the second and thirteenth papers of the judgment of the court below is written by mistake, it shall be corrected to delete it ex officio in accordance with Article 25 (1) of the Regulation