2. If there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared to the judgment of the court below, and the sentencing of the court below is not beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The grounds alleged by the Defendant as an element of sentencing are already revealed in the proceedings of the lower court’s pleadings, or the lower court appears to have sufficiently taken into account in determining the Defendant’s punishment. There is no particular change in circumstances in the sentencing guidelines with the matters subject to the conditions of sentencing after the lower judgment was sentenced.

Although the defendant denied the special violence among each of the crimes in this case in the court below, it is difficult to regard the change of circumstances that can change the sentence of the court below.

Considering the circumstances that the lower court rendered on the grounds of sentencing comprehensively taking into account the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the commission of the crime, all the sentencing conditions and the scope of recommended sentencing guidelines, including the circumstances after the commission of the crime, as well as all the sentencing conditions indicated in the instant arguments and records, such as the circumstances after the commission of the crime, the lower court’s sentencing was conducted within the reasonable scope of discretion, and cannot

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act because the defendant's appeal is without merit.