The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal in light of the various sentencing conditions in this case, the punishment sentenced by the court below (a three-year imprisonment, a kitchen, a seized kitchen and a mastch each confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. Examining the various sentencing conditions in the instant case, there are circumstances favorable to the Defendant, such as the fact that the Defendant appears to reflect the depth of the instant crime by making a net confession of the instant crime, and that the Defendant was committed to raise the living expenses in a relatively difficult family environment, and that the instant crime was committed to raise the living expenses, and that the amount of the money that the Defendant took by force was seized and returned to the victim.

However, the crime of this case is deemed to have been committed by the Defendant by impairing the convenience store and forcibly taking cash by threatening the knife a knife of the employee’s age, and the method of the crime is dangerous and serious, and the Defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment on December 7, 201, and committed again during the repeated offense period after the execution of the sentence was completed on April 30, 2012. The statutory punishment for the special robbery of this case is imprisonment with prison labor for life or for not less than five years. The lower court, which selected a limited term of imprisonment for a limited term of imprisonment, sentenced the maximum three years of imprisonment with prison labor within the scope of the sentencing guidelines (three to six years), taking into account the following factors: the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relations, motive for the crime, degree of damage, circumstances after the crime, etc., is deemed to have been unfair, and thus, the lower court’s sentencing of the Defendant is not acknowledged to be unfair.

Therefore, the defendant's ground of appeal disputing unfair sentencing is without merit.

3. As such, 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.