2. The fact that the Defendant recognized the instant crime and did not repeat the crime would be considered favorably.

However, as in the instant crime, the Defendant had been sentenced one time to imprisonment with prison labor and one time to suspend the execution of imprisonment with prison labor, as well as several times of criminal punishment. The Defendant repeatedly committed the instant crime even during the period of repeated crime for which three months have not yet passed since the Defendant was released from the same kind of crime, and the Defendant appears to have committed the instant crime for the following purposes: (a) the Defendant appears to have committed the instant crime for the following purposes: (b) the Defendant has not yet been repaid to the victim E until now; and (c) the Defendant has not yet been repaid to the victim E; and (d) other various sentencing conditions such as the Defendant’s age, sexual behavior, environment, family relation, etc. are considered to be too unreasonable.

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.