2. The Defendant recognized the instant crime and is against the law.

The defendant paid 1.5 million won to the victim and agreed that only 1.5 million won, and the injury suffered by the victim is relatively excessive.

Although there are criminal records in the defendant, it has been relatively long ago (1982, 1990, 1993, 2005, 2008). This is favorable to the defendant.

However, the crime of this case is not good because the defendant committed the crime of this case even during the period of repeated crime.

If there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the first instance court’s sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). There is no new change in circumstances that may change the sentence of the lower court in the first instance court.

This is disadvantageous to the defendant.

In full view of such circumstances as well as the Defendant’s age, environment, sexual conduct, motive for committing a crime, and circumstances before and after committing a crime, etc., the sentence of the lower court is too unreasonable as it is too unreasonable.

3. As such, the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition by the court below (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 200Da5444, Apr. 2, 200).