The sentencing of the court below (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

There are circumstances favorable to the defendant, such as the fact that the victims of the market have agreed to receive an amount equivalent to the amount of damage and expressed their desire to take the Defendant’s wife, the fact that the defendant seems to have no profit from the crime of this case, and that the defendant recognized the mistake and reflects it.

However, considering the fact that the crime of this case was committed by multiple persons who act as a group of persons, that there is no professional and good character of the crime, that there was a record of having been sentenced several times of punishment for the same crime, and that the repeated crime of this case was committed again during the repeated crime period, that the sentencing of the lower court falls under the lower limit of the punishment, and all other circumstances that form the conditions for the punishment of this case, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s sentencing is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.