2. The Korean Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the principle of trial priority and the principle of directness on the market, has a unique area of sentencing in the first instance, and there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the first instance court’s sentencing 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). In full view of the following: (a) there is no significant change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the lower court’s given that no particular new sentencing data has been submitted in the trial; and (b) the sentencing grounds (in particular, there was a history of having been punished several times for the same kind of crime) revealed in the process of the argument in the instant case, the lower court’s sentencing is too unreasonable and is beyond the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. The appeal by the defendant is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since the appeal by the defendant is without merit.

[However, the facts constituting the crime of the lower judgment are clearly stated in the first and second instances of the crime of the violation of the Road Traffic Act in Ansan District Court on April 28, 2017, and the fine of seven million won was imposed in the same court on August 9, 2018 as the same crime of the violation of the Road Traffic Act.” “Defendant was sentenced to a fine of two million won in the same court on April 28, 2017 as a person who violated the requirements of Article 48-2(1) of the Road Traffic Act at least two million won in the same court on August 9, 2018, as the person who again violated the requirements of Article 148-2(1) of the former Road Traffic Act without any amendment of the Act, since the person who violated the requirements of Article 48-2(1) of the same Act at least once, who again violated the requirements of Article 48-1(2) of the same Act.”