Since the defendant appealed only for the guilty part, and the prosecutor did not appeal, and the dismissal of prosecution that the defendant and the prosecutor did not appeal is separated, the scope of this court's judgment is limited to the guilty part of the

2. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

3. The lower court determined the Defendant’s punishment by taking into account the favorable and unfavorable circumstances to the Defendant.

In full view of all the circumstances that are conditions for sentencing in this court, the judgment of the court below was judged to have exceeded the reasonable scope of its discretion, or there is no special change in circumstances that may change the original court’s punishment.

In addition, even if the sentencing grounds revealed in the proceedings of the instant case, such as the Defendant’s age, environment, background and consequence of the crime, etc., are comprehensively taken into account, the sentencing of the lower court does not seem to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

The defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

4. 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.