The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The punishment sentenced by the first instance court to the summary of the reasons for appeal (six years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable;

2. The crime of this case was committed not only by the defendant who caused considerable physical damage, but also by causing a large number of personal damage, and the nature of the crime is not very good. In particular, the victim F was injured by 75% (3Do75%) in chloude image, and the victim F was inflicted two times in 250,000,000 won in 12 months or more in 20,000,000 won in 20,000,000 won in 12 months or more in 2 months in 2 months in 20,000 in 20,000 won in 20,000 won in 20,000 won in 20,000 won in 12 months or more in 2 months in 2 or more in 2 months in 2 years in 20, and it is inevitable to punish the defendant with severe punishment.

However, due to fire prevention, the defendant's health status is not good due to the physical surface 21.5% (the front 2-3 degrees on both sides, both sides, both sides, and both sides) of the body surface of the defendant (the fact that the defendant confessions and reflects his depth, and that the defendant has no record of criminal punishment heavier than the suspension of execution, etc.), since the defendant's age, character, character, family environment, family relationship, circumstances after the crime, and the range of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines falls under the aggravated area (the injury caused by fire, such as the front dive building, etc.) among the first category (the injury caused by the front dive structure, etc.) of the fire prevention crime group, the scope of the recommended punishment is six years to eleven years.

The first instance court, which sentenced punishment, seems to be appropriate in consideration of all the various circumstances that are the conditions for sentencing revealed in the argument of the instant case.

Therefore, the defendant.