2. The lower court rendered the above sentence by taking into account the following favorable circumstances: (a) the Defendant was punished for multiple violent crimes; (b) the Defendant committed the instant crime in the detention house despite being detained for the same kind of crime; and (c) the Defendant did not make efforts to recover damage despite the occurrence of any minor injury to the victim; and (d) the victim did not want to punish the Defendant; and (b) the victim was deemed to have attempted to do so; and (c) the victim appears to have been partly responsible for the instant crime; (d) the Defendant is against the instant crime; and (e) the instant crime was committed against the Defendant; and (e) the instant crime was committed concurrent crimes with the latter after Article 37 of the Criminal Act in relation to the special injury for which the judgment became final and conclusive pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, taking into account the fact that the sentence should be determined by taking into account equity and the case where the judgment is to be

In full view of all the sentencing conditions, including the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, circumstances leading to a crime, means and consequence, scale of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, other than the circumstances that take into account the unfavorable circumstances as above, there is no change in circumstances to change the sentencing of the lower court, and all the sentencing conditions, including the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, circumstances leading to the crime, means and consequence, the sentence imposed on the Defendant is deemed appropriate, and the lower court’s judgment exceeded

There is no circumstance that the assessment or maintenance of it is deemed unfair (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Therefore, as claimed by the Defendant, the lower court’s sentencing is too unreasonable because it is too unreasonable.

3. According to the conclusion, the Defendant’s appeal is without merit, and thus, pursuant to Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.