The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The lower court rendered a sentence by taking into account the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant committed each of the instant crimes during the period of repeated crimes even though he/she had been punished for the same kind of crime several times; and (b) the Defendant recognized each of the instant crimes and reflects the risk therefrom; (c) the Defendant’s age and health conditions; and (d) the details and circumstances after the commission of the crime; and (e) determined the sentence by taking into account the sentencing

The appellate court, compared to the first instance court, has no change in the conditions of sentencing, and the first instance sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect the first instance sentencing judgment.

The defendant was unable to find a way to recover damage to the victim because he was detained by the defendant and his social relation network is weak due to the fact that the defendant's health is not good due to depression, liverness, depression, and proof of alcohol, etc., and it seems that it was difficult for the defendant to find a way to actually recover damage to the victim.

Although it is difficult to see that the Defendant committed each of the crimes of this case by using the same method during the period of repeated crime even though the Defendant was punished for committing a crime against the patients hospitalized in the same hospital, the fact that the Defendant committed each of the crimes of this case by using the same method, and otherwise, the sentencing conditions mentioned above in the judgment

In the absence of any circumstances, the sentence against the defendant falls under the minimum limit of the statutory penalty and the sentencing guidelines [the scope of the final sentence due to the aggravation of multiple crimes: 2 to 5 years, and 1: the scope of the punishment recommended for the first crime: The basic area (2 to 4 years), which is the basic area (2 to 4 years), the scope of the punishment recommended for the second crime: the aggravated area (1 to 2 years), which is the aggravated area (10 million won) (1 to 6 months), and the sentencing range of the special aggravated person (referring to the same type of repeated crime)]. In full view of the aforementioned factors, the sentence of the court below cannot be deemed unfair because it is too much unreasonable for the court below to have imposed the punishment.

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

In conclusion, the defendant's person.