2. Under our criminal litigation law, which takes the principle of court-oriented trials and the principle of direct determination, it is reasonable to respect the determination of sentencing in cases where there exists no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and where the first instance court sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion (Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). The Defendant appears in the attitude to recognize and reflect the instant crime, and the Defendant agreed to the victim at the investigation stage, but the lower court appears to have determined the Defendant’s punishment in light of all the above circumstances, and there is no change in circumstances that may be considered in the sentencing after the sentence of the lower court, and the Defendant committed the instant crime on October 22, 2015, which was sentenced two years after the suspended sentence of imprisonment for six months on the grounds of embezzlement, etc. and was finalized on October 30, 2015, in light of the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive and method of the instant crime, and all of the following circumstances, etc.

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.