beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the imprisonment of 6 months with prison labor for the crimes Nos. 1 and 2 as indicated in the judgment below and the imprisonment of 3 to 5 as indicated in the judgment below) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. The fact that the damage to the victims of the crimes No. 1 and No. 2 in the holding of the court below is relatively large is favorable to the defendant.
However, even though the defendant had already been punished for the same kind of crime several times, and even if he had been punished for repeated crimes for the same kind of crime, the defendant's age, sex, environment, motive and consequence of the crime, circumstances revealed in the arguments of this case, such as the defendant's age, sex, environment, motive and consequence of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., and the scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines (10-2 years from the date of imprisonment) [the scope of recommended punishment] [the scope of general property] [10-2 years from the date of special aggravation] of the aggravated area (10-2 years from the date of the judgment of the court below] of the aggravated area (10-2 years from the date of general larceny] of the second category (the person subject to special aggravated punishment] of the same type of repeated crime, the defendant's argument in this part is not acceptable.
B. The fact that there is a relatively little damage to the victims of punishment for crimes Nos. 3 through 5 in the judgment of the court below, and the fact that it is necessary to consider the equality with the case where the first head of the judgment of the court below, which is a concurrent criminal relationship with the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act,
However, considering the fact that the defendant has already been punished for the same kind of crime several times, the defendant's age, sexual conduct, environment, motive and consequence of the crime, and circumstances revealed in the arguments in this case, it is not recognized that punishment for the crime No. 3 through No. 5 in the judgment of the court below is too unfair, and therefore, the defendant's assertion on this part is rejected.
3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is groundless.