2. In a case where 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.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court determined punishment in consideration of the following: (a) although the Defendant is against himself/herself; (b) the Defendant committed the instant crime without being aware of during the period of suspension of execution due to the same kind of crime; and (c) the recovery of medication is twice; and (d) there is no new circumstance to change the sentence of the lower court in the trial.

Considering the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, motive and background of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc. as revealed in the oral arguments at the lower court and the party hearing, the sentence imposed by the lower court is not hot, as it takes place within the reasonable scope of discretion.

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