2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the judgment of 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 it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, there is no change in sentencing conditions compared with the lower court’s failure to submit new sentencing data in the trial following the lower court’s pronouncement. In full view of the factors of sentencing, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive for committing the crime, circumstances after committing the crime, etc., the lower court’s sentencing is too remote and does not seem to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

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

[However, in accordance with Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, Article 314 of the Criminal Act and Article 314(1) of the Act shall be amended to “Article 314 of the Criminal Act and the choice of imprisonment” in the application of the law of the court below to “Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act”