2. The lower court, on November 5, 2010, rendered a sentence by comprehensively taking into account the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years on June 2010; (b) the Defendant was punished for violent crimes, such as having been sentenced to a suspended sentence for six months; (c) the Defendant’s repeated failure against neighboring merchants by repeatedly committing a crime while under the influence of alcohol; and (d) the Defendant’s G was at a disadvantage of causing damage to many victims; and (c) on the other hand, considering the favorable circumstances in which the Victim G was not subject to the Defendant’s punishment, the lower court imposed the sentence by comprehensively taking into account the scope of the recommendation on the sentencing guidelines established by the Supreme Court sentencing Committee, as well as the Defendant’s age, sexual behavior, the background and motive leading to the instant

When the sentencing of the lower court’s judgment is fully taken into account in the first instance court, the lower court’s judgment exceeded the reasonable bounds of discretion.

As there is no change in the sentencing conditions that can be deemed unfair to maintain the judgment of the court below as it is, the sentence of the court below cannot be deemed unfair because it is too large.

Therefore, the defendant does not accept the defendant's unfair argument.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition (Article 25 of the Rules on Criminal Procedure adding "each" to "Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act" in the first sentence of Article 260 (5) of the decision of the court below by Article 25 of the Rules on Criminal Procedure