2. In the crime of this case, the crime of this case against the victim was committed by the defendant due to the reporting of the victim, by threatening the victim to take retaliation against the crime of this case, and by obstructing the victim's street store business, the crime of this case is not good;

The defendant has a number of violent crimes, and in particular, the victim of this case has already been punished four times due to the insult, and there is a high possibility of criticism in that he has committed the same crime as the crime of this case even during the suspended execution period.

However, the first instance court, by comprehensively taking account of various sentencing conditions, including the fact that the defendant made a confession of all of the crimes in this case, and that the victim does not want the punishment of the defendant by agreement with the defendant, determined the scope of the sentencing, and then sentenced the defendant to the defendant for six months within the scope of the recommended sentencing range (two months or more of imprisonment) according to the sentencing guidelines. In light of all the sentencing reasons for the first instance court's sentencing and the process of deriving the sentence in this case's records, it is determined that the sentence imposed by the first instance court was determined to be the highest of the sentencing range among the sentencing range and the sentencing sentencing range under the sentencing guidelines, so it is not recognized that such sentencing of the first instance court is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

3. If so, 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.