The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. In light of the summary of the grounds of appeal in light of the Constitutional Court’s decision on the details leading up to the Defendant to commit the instant crime and the relevant penal provisions, the wife of Mamna and the difference between Mamna and Mamna for the recovery of skin, etc., the sentence of the lower court against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Although the defendant's primary crime is recognized, the demand for services such as helping or cutting down the blood cycle has increased rapidly, the supply of the visually impaired who obtained the qualification to be a marbrancer is difficult to view that the value of punishment for the defendant is significantly high in light of the process when the act of massage by the visually impaired was widely spread. However, there are extenuating circumstances such as the defendant's operation of the massage procedure in this case without the small scale of the place of the massage procedure in this case, and the period of the business has considerably long run until now. Further, considering the above circumstances, the degree of equity with the sentencing of the similar case should be considered in light of the defendant's age, character and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., the court below's allegation that the defendant's punishment against the defendant is appropriate is recognized, and the defendant's argument is not reasonable.

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