2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and where the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect the sentencing (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015, etc.). The fact that the history of punishment for the same kind of crime reaches six times, and that of the defendant who is the same kind of repeated crime, it is inevitable to severely punish the defendant.

The circumstances alleged by the Defendant on the grounds of appeal appear to have already been considered in the sentencing process of the lower court, and there is no new change in circumstances that could change the sentence of the lower court in the trial.

When comprehensively considering the conditions of sentencing, such as the character, conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc. as shown in the deliberation and arguments of the court below and the party concerned, and the scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines, the sentence of the court below cannot be deemed to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion or to be unfair because it is too large.

3. Accordingly, 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 without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.