The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor for a maximum of one year and two months, short of ten months, and confiscation) by the lower court are too unreasonable.

2. The lower court determined a sentence by comprehensively taking into account the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant recognized and divided the crime; (b) the victim B and C did not want to punish the Defendant; and (c) the victim D paid a certain amount of money into consideration that there are many flight records; (c) the Defendant committed the instant crime only for two months since the juvenile reformatory was temporarily released from the prison due to robbery, and the method and method of the crime, etc.; and (d) the Defendant’s age and growth environment was determined by comprehensively taking into account the circumstances and degree of other crimes; and (e) the Defendant’s punishment was determined by comprehensively taking into account

The grounds for unfair sentencing alleged by the Defendant appear to be the circumstances that the lower court had already taken into account when determining the Defendant’s punishment. The lower court’s punishment is reasonable within the reasonable scope of discretion, and there are no circumstances suggesting that the said sentencing conditions have been changed in the appellate court.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion cannot be accepted, since the court below's punishment is too heavy.

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.