2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the judgment of the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The crime of this case was committed by the Defendant when the victim was injured, and the lower court determined a punishment by considering the fact that the Defendant was injured by the victim, and that the Defendant did not properly change the victim’s punishment, and there is no new circumstance to change the sentence of the lower court in the trial.

In addition, comprehensively taking into account various sentencing conditions, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, criminal records, criminal records, the method and circumstances after the crime, etc., as shown in the arguments of the lower court and the political party, the sentence imposed by the lower court is conducted within the reasonable scope of discretion and is not hot.

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