The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The punishment sentenced by the first instance court to the summary of the reasons for appeal (three years and six months of imprisonment) shall be too unreasonable;

2. Determination is recognized as a favorable sentencing factor, such as the fact that the Defendant recognized his/her criminal act and showed an attitude against his/her own will, that the injured person is relatively heavy, that the injured person does not want the punishment of the defendant, that the injured person does not want the punishment of the defendant, and that he/she has no record of punishment except for a fine imposed once due to the violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) around 2007.

However, the crime of this case is recognized as a disadvantageous sentencing factor such as the Defendant’s use of the entire money and valuables taken by force as above, and the Defendant’s use of the money and valuables for entertainment expenses, etc., when the victim saw the victim’s resistance, and the victim boomed against the victim, thereby causing the victim’s bodily injury.

In full view of the aforementioned factors of sentencing and the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, intelligence and environment, motive and background leading to the instant crime, the means and consequence of the instant crime, and other circumstances revealed in the pleadings, the sentence sentenced by the first instance court is deemed to be adequate, and it cannot be deemed that it is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.