2. The judgment of the defendant is recognized as a favorable sentencing factor, such as the fact that he/she recognized his/her criminal act and expressed his/her attitude of pening, and that he/she seems to have good health.

However, it is also recognized that the defendant has been punished several times for the same crime, and furthermore, even though he was sentenced to a 6-month probation due to a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, he committed the crime of this case without being aware of it during the period of the probation, and even if he was sentenced to a 2-month probation, he was absent in the trial to avoid the invalidation of the above probation, and voluntarily surrenders to the investigation agency who was under the above probation period.

In full view of the aforementioned factors of sentencing and the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, intelligence and environment, criminal records, motive and background leading to the instant crime, means and consequence of the instant crime, and various circumstances revealed in pleadings, such as the circumstances after the commission of the crime, the sentence sentenced by the first instance court is deemed appropriate, and it is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

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