The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (such as imprisonment for three years and six months, forfeiture (No. 1, etc.) imposed by the court below is too unreasonable.

2. The following are the circumstances favorable to the Defendant: (a) the Defendant was showing both of the facts of the crime and reflects the mistake; (b) the Defendant was a primary offender who had no record of criminal punishment prior to the instant case; (c) the Defendant was a second-class physically disabled person who was unable to have good health conditions due to urterology, etc.; and (d) the degree of damage caused by the injury and the crime of assault is not much serious.

On the other hand, the crime of this case is committed by the defendant who attempted to explosion his own vehicle within the hospital, which caused injuries to the victims in the course of the crime. It is highly dangerous that such a crime may cause serious harm to the lives, bodies, property, etc. of many people. The crime of this case not only caused considerable property damage to the affected hospital, but also it seems that the employees and the patients of the above hospital who observed the above crime at the time were suffering from severe mental shock. Nevertheless, there are many circumstances unfavorable to the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant did not agree with the victims up to the trial and did not completely recover from damage.

As above, in full view of the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive leading to the instant crime, result, circumstances after the commission of the crime, etc., as well as the scope of recommended sentences according to the sentencing guidelines (at least three years of imprisonment), etc., the lower court’s punishment is sufficiently recognized within the scope of the pertinent punishment according to its liability, and thus, it is not recognized that it is unfair because it is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

3. Conclusion.