The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

The sentence of the court below that sentenced the defendant four years of imprisonment with prison labor is too unreasonable.

Judgment

In light of the following: (a) the Defendant recognized all of the instant crimes; (b) the Defendant was committing the instant robbery; (c) the Defendant was unable to force and withdraw the actual property due to the robbery of this case; and (d) the amount of damage to each of the instant larceny was not significant; (b) the Defendant’s dynamic nature appears to have affected the instant crimes (it cannot be deemed that the Defendant committed the instant crimes under the conditions that the Defendant had no capacity to discern things or make decisions due to mental disorder, in view of the description of the result of mental appraisal as to the Defendant; (d) the circumstances leading up to the instant crimes; (e) the method and method of the instant crimes; (e) the Defendant’s attitude and speech before and after the instant crimes; and (e)

On the other hand, the crime of this case committed assaulting the victim D, a female licensed real estate agent, who is a female licensed real estate agent with the defendant in an abandoned house in order to collect money, and committed the crime of this case repeatedly within the short period because it stolen the property of the hospitalized patients at the hospital, and committed the crime repeatedly within the short period. The victim D seems to have suffered serious mental and physical harm to the degree that it is difficult to lead a normal home life as well as the activities as licensed real estate agent, and the victims D did not recover from the victims at all, and the victims D want to be punished against the defendant. The defendant is in a number of larceny and violence departments, and the defendant committed the crime of this case during the period of repeated crime is disadvantageous to the defendant.

As above, comprehensively taking account of the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and means of crime as well as the circumstances favorable to the Defendant, as well as the sentencing conditions stipulated in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, such as the circumstances after the crime, etc., it is recognized that the sentence imposed by the lower court exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.