In addition, the appeal by the candidate for medical treatment and custody is dismissed.

2. Determination

A. In a case where there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared to the part of the defendant case, and the sentencing of the court below is not beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect this.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). No new sentencing data is submitted to the Defendant, and there is no particular change in the sentencing conditions compared with the original judgment.

The circumstances alleged by the defendant as the grounds for appeal seems to have already been considered in determining the punishment against the defendant.

In full view of the various sentencing conditions shown in the records and pleadings, the lower court’s sentence against the Defendant exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

(b) When the part of a medical treatment and custody application case has filed an appeal against a prosecuted case, the medical treatment and custody application case shall be deemed to have been filed pursuant to Article 14 (2) of the Medical Treatment and Custody Act;

However, there is no statement in the petition of appeal or statement of reasons for appeal concerning the medical treatment and custody application filed by the defendant, and even after ex officio examination, there is no reason to reverse the part of the judgment below's medical treatment and custody

3. The appeal by the defendant is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act and Article 51 of the Medical Treatment and Custody Act on the grounds that the appeal is groundless.