2. The judgment of the court below is based on the facts that the defendant led to confession and reflects each of the crimes of this case, and that there was no record of punishment for the same crime before each of the crimes of this case, even if each of the crimes of this case is considered, each of the crimes of this case requires money from the victim by taking advantage of the weak points that the victim asked the defendant to take retaliation against the former offender several times, and thus, it is not good that the crime is committed in light of the motive, method, etc. of the crime, and the total amount of damage is not less than 26 million won, not only does it reach an agreement with the victim until the trial but also does not reach an agreement with the victim, and it is not even if considerable time has passed after the crime, and considering all other circumstances that form the conditions of sentencing, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive and circumstance of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable, and 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 as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

However, in the application of the law of the court below, since the proviso of Article 42, which is written in the column of "1. concurrent concurrent crimes", is obvious that it is a clerical error, the ex officio deletion of it pursuant to Article 25, Paragraph 1 of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure

.