2. The Defendant’s confession of the instant crime at the trial is favorable to the Defendant. However, the instant crime was involved in the so-called Bosing, etc., which causes damage to many unspecified victims by systematic means, and thus, requires a strict punishment for such a crime due to the high possibility of social criticism. The benefits acquired by the Defendant due to the instant crime are low.

The sentencing of the lower court does not seem to have exceeded the reasonable bounds of discretion, unlike the fact that the judgment of the lower court exceeded the reasonable bounds of discretion.

There is no circumstance to be assessed (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In full view of various sentencing conditions stipulated in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, including the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive, means, and consequence, before and after the commission of the crime, the lower court’s punishment against the Defendant is too unreasonable, and thus, the Defendant’s improper assertion of sentencing is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.