2. The Korean Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the principle of directness, has a unique area for sentencing determination, and there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the first instance court’s sentencing 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). In this case, there is no particular change in the sentencing conditions compared to the original judgment.

In addition, comprehensively taking into account all the conditions of the arguments and the records of the instant case, including the details and contents of the instant crime, motive, means and consequence of the instant crime, relationship between the Defendant and the victims, the victim’s results and recovery of damage, the criminal records, the criminal records, the circumstances after the instant crime, and the Defendant’s age and occupation, family relationship, economic form, health condition, etc., it is not recognized that the lower court’s sentencing that sentenced the Defendant to a fine of KRW 3 million exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. Accordingly, the defendant's appeal cannot be accepted, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.