2. Under our criminal litigation law, which takes the trial-oriented principle and direct principle, it is reasonable to respect the determination of sentencing in cases where there exists no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and where the first instance court sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion (Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Although the Defendant appears to have recognized and opposed to each of the instant crimes, he/she is recognized, the lower court appears to have no change of circumstances that may be considered in sentencing after the sentence was rendered, and there was no change of circumstances that could be considered in sentencing after considering such circumstances, the lower court did not appear to have determined the sentence against the Defendant; the Defendant did not appear to have agreed with the victim or did not receive any suspicion from the victim; the Defendant had the history of having previously been sentenced several times of criminal punishment for violent crimes; the Defendant did not change in its nature in light of the age, sex, environment, motive and method of each of the instant crimes; the records and circumstances of each of the instant crimes; and all of the following circumstances.

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