2. The judgment is a sentencing data favorable to the Defendant, for instance, that the Defendant recognized the Defendant’s mistake from the investigative agency to the court, and repeated to prevent recidivism, and that there are three children who must support the Defendant, and in particular, one of them appears to have taken out while having a intellectual disability.

However, the court below seems to have determined a sentence by considering all the above sentencing data favorable to the defendant, and the defendant has the same criminal records more than several times. In particular, the defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of one year by imprisonment with prison labor at the Jung-gu District Court on February 17, 2012 due to the violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) and the judgment becomes final and conclusive on May 19, 2012. In full view of the fact that this case was the crime committed during the suspended sentence period of the above final and conclusive judgment, and all other circumstances, including the defendant's age, character, character, family relation, environment, occupation, circumstance and contents leading to the crime of this case, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the above argument by the defendant cannot be deemed to be unfair because the sentence of the court below is too excessive.

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