2. The following are the circumstances favorable to the Defendant: (a) the Defendant recognized the instant crime; (b) there appears to be economic difficulties as a recipient of basic living benefits; and (c) the instant crime is in the relation of concurrent crimes with the obstruction of performance of official duties, etc. for which judgment became final and conclusive; and (d) there is a need to consider equity with the case where a judgment was received.

On the other hand, the crime of this case is a situation unfavorable to the defendant, such as the following: (a) the crime of this case was committed by the defendant in a dispute over a non-payment issue with the victim's house; (b) the nature of the crime is not less than that of intimidation by intrusion upon the victim's house; (c) the defendant has been subject to criminal punishment several times prior to the crime of this case; (d) the defendant has a history of being subject to criminal punishment for violent crimes several times; and (e) the court below has imposed a fine reduced than the

In full view of the above circumstances and other factors of sentencing, including the background of the instant crime, the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, and environment, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable as it is too unreasonable, and thus, the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

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