2. The lower court sentenced one year to the Defendant, taking into account the circumstances favorable to the Defendant, favorable to the Defendant, and the recommended sentencing criteria of the Sentencing Committee.

There is no circumstance that the lower court’s sentencing is deemed to have exceeded the reasonable bounds of discretion, or that it is unreasonable to maintain the sentencing of the lower court, in full view of the following: (a) the Defendant committed the instant crime at least two months after having been released without being aware of the fact that he was committed for a repeated crime even though he was committed for the same crime; and (b) the Defendant did not reach an agreement with the victim up to the time of the trial; and (c) the sentencing guidelines, etc. are deemed to have exceeded the reasonable bounds of discretion; or (d) the Defendant is deemed to have maintained

In addition, considering the circumstances and results of the crime of this case, the sentence of the court below is proper, and it is not recognized that it is unfair because it is too unreasonable, considering the circumstances after the crime of this case.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the conclusion is groundless.