2. Considering the unique area of sentencing of the first instance that is respected under the principle of trial priority and the principle of direct determination under the Criminal Procedure Act, and the ex post facto core nature of the appellate court, the first instance sentencing judgment exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion in light of the following factors: (a) the conditions of sentencing specified in the process of the first instance sentencing hearing and the sentencing criteria, etc.

In light of the records newly discovered in the course of the appellate court’s sentencing hearing, it is reasonable to file an unfair judgment of the first instance court, only in cases where it is deemed unfair to maintain the sentencing of the first instance court as it is for the court to judge the sentencing of the first instance court.

Unless there exist such exceptional circumstances, it is desirable to respect the sentencing of the first instance trial (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). It is desirable to respect the sentencing of the first instance trial in the absence of such exceptional circumstances (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The fact that the Defendant does not have the same criminal record of robbery or larceny, the Defendant’s depth reflects the crime, the Defendant agreed with some victims, and the Defendant, who was in his living environment, seems to have caused the instant crime by contingency. The degree of

The fact that the robbery was committed with the escape of a defect and the crime of robbery was committed with the attempted crime is favorable to the defendant.

However, the crime of this case was committed by the defendant after salving and destroying to a new wall, and forcibly withdrawal of property by intrusioning on an entertainment main place. In light of the method of the crime, etc., the crime and the circumstances of the crime are very heavy in light of the method of the crime, etc., and the defendant was sentenced to criminal punishment several times, and committed the crime of this case again during the period of repeated crime after having been sentenced to imprisonment for one year and six months for the purpose of destroying the structure at present, and committed the crime again during the repeated crime.

. The above.