2. The lower court determined that the Defendant committed the instant crime under the unfavorable circumstances to the Defendant, taking into account the circumstances favorable to the Defendant, such as the fact that the Defendant had been punished several times for the same type of crime, the fact that the Defendant would have not been subject to punishment during the suspension of execution, and that the victim would have been seen to have received a considerable mental impulse due to the instant crime, and that the Defendant led to the confession of the instant crime, and that the victim expressed his intent not to punish the Defendant, the lower sentence was determined within the scope of the sentencing guidelines set by the Sentencing Committee set forth in the Sentencing Committee within the applicable sentencing range.

The sentencing of the lower court appears to have been appropriately determined taking into account the above various circumstances, and there is no new circumstance or special change in circumstances that can be reflected in the sentencing after the sentence of the lower judgment.

In addition, taking into account the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, criminal records, circumstances, and result of the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too heavy to the extent of deviating from the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, since the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.