2. The Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the direct principle, has the unique area of the first deliberation as to the determination of sentencing. As such, in a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, the health unit of the instant case and the Defendant recognized the instant crime once in the trial. However, in light of the foregoing legal doctrine, the lower court did not appear to have changed to the extent that it did not change the circumstances to the extent that the lower court did not submit new data on sentencing in the trial, and other circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, sexual behavior, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, etc., are considered, and the lower court’s punishment was excessively exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

shall not be deemed to exist.

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.