The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. On April 2, 2012, the Defendant: (a) on April 2, 2012, 222:5, the Defendant was forced to knenee knee knee knee knee knee kne, and knee kne knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee kne

Therefore, the judgment of the court below that recognized the defendant as assaulting the victims for the purpose of evading arrest, and held the defendant liable for the robbery, which affected the conclusion of the judgment by mismisunderstanding the facts in violation of the rules of evidence.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (three years and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. The crime of quasi-Robbery under Article 335 of the Criminal Act is established when the thief committed assault and threat in order to resist the recovery of property, to escape arrest or to destroy a trace of the crime at the time of the crime of this case. In full view of the statements made in the victim G, investigation agency of E, and court below, the court below found that the defendant was reliable in the statement of the consistent victim to the effect that the defendant attempted to flee due to the thiefing of G's chest with the victim G's chest, being satisfing, being pushed back with his hair, being pushed back with his hair, or being satisfed with his head, etc., by taking account of the fact that the defendant committed the crime of robbery at the time of the crime of this case, and thus, the court below acknowledged the criminal liability of robbery against the defendant.

Examining the reasoning of the judgment of the court below in comparison with the records, the judgment of the court below is just, and there is no illegality of misconception of facts against the rules of evidence.

The defendant's assertion of mistake is without merit.

B. The defendant has been punished several times for the same offense.