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, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared with the lower court’s failure to submit new sentencing data at the trial and the lower court. In full view of the factors revealed in the arguments in the instant case including various circumstances considered in sentencing, it is difficult for the lower court to deem that the sentence imposed by the lower court exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

In particular, this is more so in light of the fact that the defendant committed each of the crimes of this case since the criminal records of this case are accumulated and the execution of imprisonment has not been completed for a long time.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

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