In this regard, the fact that the defendant's mistake is against the defendant, and the fact that the illegal building was restored to its original state by removing the whole building at the original trial is recognized.

However, the size of the building, etc. installed by the defendant without permission was small, the defendant did not comply with the legitimate corrective order for a considerable period even after being issued a corrective order, and there was a history of punishment already imposed only once for a crime similar to this case.

In full view of all the above circumstances, the sentencing of the court below is too unfair because it goes beyond the reasonable scope of discretion and is not unfair, in light of the following circumstances: (a) the background and method of the instant crime; (b) the degree of the offense; (c) the record of the offense; (d) the history of the punishment; and (e) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, career, home environment, etc.; and (c) the circumstances

Therefore, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, since there is no reason to appeal.