2. The fact that the Defendant is both recognized and against all the instant crimes, the fact that the Defendant was committed by the cafeteria, the fact that the victim, who is a cafeteria, was committed by contingency while in dispute with the victim, was committed by the victim, the degree of the victim's injury, the fact that the victim did not have much weight, the fact that the Defendant agreed with the victim was 72 years old, the fact that the Defendant is the age of 72 years old, and that the recipient of basic living is considered to be economically lacking, are favorable to the Defendant.

However, the court below seems to have already determined a punishment in consideration of the above favorable circumstances. The crime of this case is committed jointly with D, which the defendant used a meal with a restaurant operator, and the nature of the crime is extremely poor in light of the circumstances of the crime, the method and manner of the crime, and the result, etc., and the defendant had the record of criminal punishment for 13 times prior to the crime of this case (five times in actual punishment, one time in suspended execution, and seven times in total) by taking into account the circumstances unfavorable to the defendant, such as the defendant's age, family relation, criminal record, relationship, character and conduct, environment, means and method of the crime, the motive and circumstance of the crime, etc., as well as all of the sentencing conditions specified in the arguments of this case, such as the defendant's age, family relation, criminal record, character and behavior, the environment, the motive and circumstance of the crime, etc. after the crime, and it is not determined to

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.