2. Determination

A. The appellate court, compared to the first instance court, should respect the first instance sentencing judgment in a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing, and the first instance sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion.

B. The lower court sentenced the Defendant to a punishment by comprehensively taking account of the following factors: (a) the Defendant was a majority of criminal records; (b) the Defendant committed the instant case during the period of repeated crime; and (c) the victim was unable to recover from any harm even after having committed harsh violence; and (b) the sentencing conditions, including the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, circumstances, and circumstances after the crime, were comprehensively considered

(c)

The grounds for unfair sentencing (a confession, health condition, etc.) asserted by the defendant appears to have been determined by the court below, which has already taken into account sufficient factors in determining the punishment against the defendant, and the above conditions of sentencing have changed in the trial.

There is no circumstance to see the above sentencing conditions, and considering the above sentencing conditions, the sentence of the court below is determined to be reasonable within the reasonable scope of discretion.

Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

3. The appeal by the defendant is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal by the defendant is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.