2. Determination

A. Under our criminal litigation law, which takes the principle of trial-oriented and directness, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the first instance court’s sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect the sentencing (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). (b) In light of the following, the court below determined the above sentence with due regard to the consideration of the sentencing as stated in its reasoning. Since the Defendant, who had been punished several times due to the instant crime, including the Defendant’s release, has committed the instant crime, and even failed to receive a letter from the injured party, new sentencing materials that could change the sentence of the court below did not have been added to the trial court’s final judgment, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc., the court below’s judgment is too unreasonable and inappropriate.

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.