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 Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015. (See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Considering the circumstances favorable to the Defendant (the fact that the Defendant recognized his/her own responsibility for each of the crimes of this case, the agreement with the victim D), unfavorable circumstances (the fact that the Defendant’s execution of punishment for the same crime has been completed) (the fact that it does not seem that the Defendant committed each of the crimes of this case, and the fact that the victim F, H has not been recovered, and that the Defendant has a history of criminal punishment several times for the same crime) and other circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, background and method of the crime, frequency of the crime, type of the crime, degree of damage, and attitude of injury after the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable even if it further examines various circumstances, which are the conditions for sentencing specified in the record and pleadings

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.