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 change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the original judgment because new sentencing materials have not been submitted at the trial court; and (b) the reasons for sentencing revealed in the proceedings of the instant case [in particular, one year and two years of imprisonment, which is the sum of the principal case and the crime of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint injury) and the crime of interference with business, which is the sum of the term of imprisonment for the crime of violating the Punishment of Violences, etc. (Joint Injury) and the crime of this case committed on January 20, 2018, it cannot be said that the sentencing of the lower court is too unreasonable to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. The appeal by the defendant is groundless. Thus, the appeal by the defendant is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.