2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to 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 such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, the lower court, based on the foregoing, determined the sentence by taking into account the various circumstances as indicated in its reasoning.

In addition to the circumstances indicated by the court below, there is no new circumstance to change the sentence of the court below in the trial, and in particular, the amount of wages and retirement allowances in arrears is 9,387,00 won in total for 13 persons, with considerable damage to workers, and large scale of entertainment establishments without permission for business, and other factors of sentencing as indicated in the argument of this case, including the defendant's age, sex and conduct, environment, motive and means of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence of the court below is too excessive and exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

It does not appear.

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 defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.