2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with 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). The lower court determined the sentence against the Defendant by comprehensively taking into account the circumstances favorable to the Defendant and the unfavorable circumstances.

The circumstance of the defendant's assertion and the circumstance of the prosecutor's assertion on the grounds of appeal are considered already in the sentencing process of the court below.

In addition, there is no new change in circumstances that can change the sentence of the court below in the first instance court.

When comprehensively considering the conditions of sentencing, such as the character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., as shown in the deliberation of the court below and the party concerned, the sentence of the court below is too heavy, or is deemed unfair because it is frighten from a reasonable scope of discretion (the defendant did not submit the reason for appeal even after being served with the notice of receipt of the records of trial on January 10, 2018, but the prosecutor appealed on its own judgment as the prosecutor appealed.). 3. As such, the appeal by the defendant and the public prosecutor is all groundless, and thus, it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.