2. Considering the circumstances alleged by the Defendant and the fact that the victims were not subject to punishment for the same kind of crime, even though the Defendant had been already punished several times, the Defendant again committed each of the crimes of this case during the period of the same repeated crime, ② the Defendant was arrested in the act of crime on May 13, 2016 and was released on the same day after being investigated, and again released on May 15, 2016. ③ In light of this point, it appears that the Defendant’s reflective nature is insufficient not only to doubt whether it is true but also to endeavor to improve his criminal behavior by continuously receiving treatment of alcohol dependence symptoms, etc. ④ Furthermore, considering that the Defendant’s age, sex, character, intelligence and environment, relationship with the victim, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc., the Defendant exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, it does not seem to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. In conclusion, the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed pursuant to Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition by the lower court (Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, on the ground that the part “ May 15, 2015” in the second page 14 of the lower judgment is obvious that it is a clerical error of “ May 15, 2016.”