아동ㆍ청소년의성보호에관한법률위반(알선영업행위등)등
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) is that the sentence of the lower court [one year of suspended sentence for a crime of violating the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (the composition and activities of organizations, etc.)] is too unreasonable for the remaining crimes except for the crimes of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (seven years of imprisonment for a year of suspended sentence for a year, and violation of the Act on the Punishment of Violences, etc. (the composition and activities
2. It is desirable to refrain from rendering a sentence that does not change the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and where the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect them. Although the sentence of the first instance falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to refrain from rendering a sentence that does not differ from the first instance court on the sole ground that the opinion of the appellate court is somewhat different from that of the appellate court (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court determined a sentence by comprehensively taking into account all the circumstances favorable to the Defendant as stated in its holding, as the lower court did not submit new materials for sentencing, and there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared with the lower court’s age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s sentence is too unfair, considering the various circumstances that serve as the conditions for the trial of sentencing in the lower court and the first instance court after the crime.
Therefore, the defendant's argument of sentencing 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 grounds that the appeal of the defendant is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition by the court below (Provided, That Article 268 of the Criminal Act is clearly omitted between "Article 258-2 of the Criminal Act" and "Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act" among "Article 255 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act" and "Article 255 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act.