2. If 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.

Although the sentence of the first instance court falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, it is desirable to refrain from imposing a sentence that does not differ from that of the first instance court on the sole ground that it is somewhat different from the opinion of the appellate court.

(Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). We examine the foregoing legal doctrine in light of the foregoing.

There is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the original judgment because new sentencing materials have not been submitted in the trial.

In full view of all the reasons for sentencing presented by the court below, it is not recognized that the sentencing of the court below exceeded the reasonable scope of its discretion because it is too large.

Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

3. The defendant's appeal is without merit and thus dismissed pursuant to Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.