Judgment

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

(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). As to the instant case, there is no significant change in the sentencing conditions compared to the lower court in the appellate trial.

Along with the fact that the Defendant has no record of criminal punishment in Korea, and around March 19, 2019, when entering Korea to punish money, it appears that the instant crime was committed in order to prepare expenses to return money to China because of the change of money punishment, and that all of the instant crimes were recognized, and that the Defendant’s attitude of obstination and obsation seems to be inadequate due to congenital brain type, etc., the normal circumstances favorable to the Defendant should be considered.

However, the crime of this case is not suitable in light of the content, means and method of the crime, danger of behavior attitude, etc., after visiting Maart operated by the victim 3 days prior to the crime, and ascertaining that the victim is in the mixed business of the 60 female female victim, preparing for the knife on the day of the crime, and making the withdrawal of the knife money to the victim and making the withdrawal of the money.

The defendant was unable to receive a letter from the victim.

In full view of such circumstances as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the commission of the crime, circumstances after the commission of the crime, etc., even if considering the favorable circumstances of the Defendant, the sentence imposed by the lower court is unreasonable because it goes beyond the reasonable scope of discretion.

Defendant

We do not accept the argument.

The defendant's appeal is dismissed on the ground that it is without merit.