2. The fact that the defendant does not commit a second offense while being aware of the crime, and that the economic situation of the defendant does not seem to be sufficient is favorable.

In light of the aforementioned circumstances, the lower court appears to have determined the minimum statutory punishment in a sentence of three million won, which is the minimum statutory punishment, by taking account of the aforementioned circumstances, and on the other hand, 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, Jul. 23, 2015). In so doing, the lower court did not reveal any special circumstances to the extent that the lower court’s punishment would be changed in the trial, and it is difficult to view that the lower court’s punishment is unfair because it goes beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, by comprehensively taking account of various sentencing conditions, such as the Defendant’s character and conduct

The defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

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