Judgment

It is reasonable to respect the sentencing of the first instance court in cases where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion. Although the sentence of the first instance court falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, it is desirable to refrain from rendering a sentence that does not differ from the first instance court on the sole ground that the sentence of the first instance falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, it is somewhat different from the appellate court’s view (Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In light of the foregoing legal principles, in light of the unfavorable circumstances, such as the following: (a) there is no change in the conditions of sentencing and the first instance court’s sentencing since new sentencing data have not been submitted at the health stand, and there is no change in the conditions of sentencing; and (b) it cannot be deemed that the sentence of the lower court that sentenced six years to the lower limit of the recommended sentencing based on the sentencing guidelines is too unreasonable to the extent that it

The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act as there is no reason to appeal.