2. Where there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared to the judgment of the court below, and the sentencing of the court below is not beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Circumstances alleged by the Defendant as an element of sentencing in this court are already revealed in the proceedings of the lower court’s pleadings, or the lower court appears to have sufficiently taken into account in determining the Defendant’s punishment. There are no particular changes in the circumstances in the sentencing guidelines and the matters on which the sentencing was imposed after the lower judgment was sentenced.

Considering the circumstances indicated by the lower court on the grounds of sentencing, comprehensively taking into account the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive, means and consequence of the crime, conditions of sentencing as indicated in the instant arguments and the records, and the scope of recommended sentences based on the sentencing guidelines, such as the circumstances after the crime was committed, the lower court’s sentencing is too unreasonable as it takes place within the reasonable scope of discretion, even in view of the circumstances that the Defendant was in the grounds of appeal

Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

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