The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the court below (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The judgment is one of the conditions for sentencing favorable to the defendant, such as: (a) the Defendant’s mistake reflects in depth; (b) the Defendant was confiscated immediately after the crime was committed; and (c) the Defendant appears to have temporarily returned to the victim; (d) the Defendant’s efforts to adapt to society while returning to religion after the execution of the final sentence was completed; and (e) the Defendant’s suffering from heavy wind, etc. are not good in health conditions.

However, the Defendant again committed the same kind of crime because he/she did not have been sentenced two times or more due to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes due to the theft of cattle, even though he/she had been sentenced to two times or more, and did not have been sentenced five months after the release. The instant crime is an offense, the lower court’s minimum statutory penalty amounting to six years of imprisonment, and the lower court sentenced the Defendant to the maximum sentence within the scope of the recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines set by the Sentencing Commission of the Supreme Court (three to six years of imprisonment) after discretionary mitigation, in full view of various circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, intelligence and environment, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court cannot be deemed to be unfair because it is

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.