2. It does not seem that new circumstances or special changes are likely to be reflected in sentencing after the decision of the lower court was rendered.

Considering the fact that the Defendant was aware of the crime of this case, and the Defendant could have been tried simultaneously with the crime for which judgment became final and conclusive, the sentencing of the lower court is not heavy in view of the following: (i) the crime of this case was committed by assaulting other water reduction on the ground that the Defendant was detained as a separate crime, and the nature of the crime is poor; (ii) the degree of injury to the victim is also not somewhat weak; (iii) the Defendant has already been subject to criminal punishment at least 15 times; and (iv) the Defendant again commits the crime of this case even during the period of repeated offense; and (iii) even during the trial of the lower court, it is obvious that the Defendant still commits another water reduction and commits a violation of legal order, such as assaulting other water reduction, thereby breaking the legal order.

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.