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 it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). The lower court determined a sentence against the Defendant by taking into account the following favorable circumstances: (a) the specific content of the crime committed by the Defendant and the degree of interference with the victim’s business; (b) the Defendant was subject to criminal punishment several times for the same kind of crime; (c) the Defendant was under criminal punishment; (d) the Defendant did not have any record of criminal punishment exceeding a fine; and (e) the Defendant had no record of criminal punishment; and (e) the Defendant

Based on the above legal principles, there is no new circumstance to consider the sentencing after the pronouncement of the lower judgment, and even considering the factors revealed in the course of the pleadings of the instant case including the various circumstances considered in the sentencing, the lower court’s sentencing is not sufficient to be deemed to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

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