2. The Defendant shows the attitude to recognize and reflect the instant crime.

This is the circumstances favorable to the defendant.

However, the crime of this case is not likely to be a crime because the defendant who was in the period of suspension of the execution of the crime of this case is prone to the victim's level due to a shoulder sofes that the defendant is a dangerous object.

The Defendant was unable to receive a letter from the injured party.

If there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the first instance court’s sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). There is no new change in circumstances that may change the sentence of the lower court in the first instance court.

This is disadvantageous to the defendant.

In full view of such circumstances as well as the Defendant’s age, environment, sexual conduct, motive for committing a crime, and circumstances before and after committing a crime, etc., the sentence of the lower court is too unreasonable as it is too unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition by the lower court (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 258-2(2) of the Criminal Act). However, in the application of the statutes of the lower judgment, the “Article 258-2(2) of the Criminal Act” is obvious that it is a clerical error in the “Article 258-2(1) of the Criminal Act,” and thus, it is obvious that