특수재물손괴등
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment for up to eight months, suspension of execution for two years, probation, and community service for up to 80 hours) of the lower court is too unreasonable;
On the date of the first instance trial, the Defendant asserted that such facts were not properly reflected, and stated that he appealed on the sole ground of unreasonable sentencing, inasmuch as there were circumstances to consider the circumstances of the instant case at the first instance trial.
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 them. Although the sentence of the first instance falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, it is desirable to reverse the judgment of the first instance court solely on the ground that it is somewhat different from the opinion of the appellate court, and to refrain from imposing a sentence that does not differ
(2) In light of the aforementioned legal principles, the lower court’s punishment was determined by fully taking account of all circumstances, including the circumstances asserted as the grounds for appeal, such as the circumstance in which the Defendant agreed with the victim of property damage, and there was no change in the sentencing conditions compared with the lower court’s judgment, and thus, there was no change in the sentencing conditions as to the instant records and arguments (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In so doing, it is not recognized that the lower court’s punishment was too excessive and exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, by comprehensively taking account of all the following factors: (a) the circumstance in which the Defendant asserted as the grounds for appeal, such as the circumstance in which the victim of property damage and the victim of new sentencing, was presented; and (b) there was no change in the sentencing conditions compared with the lower court’s judgment.
3. As such, the defendant's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.