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). The following are the circumstances favorable to the Defendant: (a) the Defendant appears to have committed the instant crime, while recognizing all of the instant crimes; (b) the Defendant’s parents’ health status is not good; and (c) the Defendant appears to have no economic benefit from each of the instant crimes.

However, even though the Defendant was sentenced to two years of the suspended sentence on June 9, 2017 for the same crime on the same crime, he again committed the instant crime during the suspended sentence, the amount of marijuana that the Defendant purchased and distributed, the Defendant took part in the instant crime, and other favorable sentencing conditions as shown in the instant records and arguments, considering that the Defendant’s favorable sentencing conditions as seen earlier were taken into account, it cannot be said that the Defendant’s sentence against the Defendant was too excessive and exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, and no significant changes in sentencing conditions have been found compared with the lower court.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is difficult to accept.

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