The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of each of the instant crimes, the Defendant was in a state of mental disability and mental retardation.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (fine 1,300,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the record as to the claim of mental retardation, it cannot be deemed that the Defendant was in a weak state of ability to discern things or make decisions due to mental fission at the time of each of the instant crimes, in light of various circumstances, including the following: (a) the Defendant is deemed to have received medical treatment from around January 27, 201 due to mental fission, but on the other hand, the background and means of each of the instant crimes; (b) the Defendant’s behavior after the commission of the crime; and (c) the Defendant stated the process of the crime to some extent.

B. In full view of the background of each of the instant crimes and the method of committing each of the instant crimes and the fact that the nature of the crime is not less than that of the crime, the fact that the same type of crime has been punished several times, and other factors such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, home environment, and the conditions of sentencing as indicated in the instant pleadings, such as the circumstances before and after the instant crime, the lower court’s sentence cannot be deemed unfair even if considering the grounds for sentencing asserted by the Defendant

3. According to the conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.