2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the judgment of 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 it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015 (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court, despite the fact that the Defendant had been subject to punishment several times of the same kind of crime, has committed another crime, and the Defendant has been punished for violence-related crimes in addition to each of the above crimes, and was sentenced to punishment in consideration of the fact that the Defendant has a large amount of risk of committing the instant crime: Provided, That the Defendant agreed with the victims, and that the degree of

In addition, comprehensively taking into account various sentencing conditions, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, motive and background of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, as shown in the oral argument of the court below and the party hearing, the sentence imposed by the court below is not hot within the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. Therefore, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, since the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.