2. The judgment of unfair sentencing refers to the case where the sentence of the judgment of the court below is too heavy or too minor in light of the content of the specific case.

Based on the statutory penalty, the sentencing is a discretionary judgment that takes place within a reasonable and appropriate scope by comprehensively taking into account the conditions of the sentencing prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act based on the statutory penalty, and there is a unique area of the first instance court in our Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the direct principle.

In addition to these circumstances and the ex post facto nature of the appellate court, if there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court is not beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015 (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). Under favorable circumstances, the lower court sentenced the Defendant to the said punishment by taking into account the following: (a) the crime of Bosing is serious social harm, such as the fact that the Defendant is arrested as a flagrant offender for the crime of 2018, and the fact that there is no significant profit for the Defendant; (b) the crime of Bosing is causing damage to an unspecified number of unspecified victims in a planned and systematic manner; and (c) the degree of participation is not easy in light of the period during which the Defendant participated in the crime; (d) the Defendant was released from the arrest of a flagrant offender for the crime of 2019; and (e) the Defendant was not recovered from damage.