2. If there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance trial, and the first instance sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). Although the degree of violence committed by the Defendant is not very heavy, the Defendant repeatedly commits a crime similar to that committed, and thereby, is likely to be subject to criticism by the Defendant by putting the instant crime again against the Defendant, even if the Defendant’s sentence was imposed and the execution of the sentence was completed.

Although the defendant has reached an agreement with some victims in the first instance trial, in light of the criminal facts of the defendant, it is not a new normal relationship or change of circumstances that can change the sentence of the court below.

In addition, when comprehensively considering the defendant's age, sexual conduct, motive and circumstances of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the court below was conducted within the reasonable scope of discretion and is not hot.

3. 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.