2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with 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 Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, the following is deemed to have been sufficiently considered as the sentencing grounds for the judgment of the first instance court, and the circumstances alleged by the Defendant are deemed to have been sufficiently considered as the sentencing grounds for the judgment of the first instance court, and there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared with the judgment of the first instance

In addition, considering the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, criminal records, motive and background of the offense, means and consequence of the offense, etc., as well as various other circumstances, which form the conditions for sentencing as shown in the instant records and arguments, such as the circumstances after the offense, it is not determined that the sentencing of the court of first instance is excessive and goes beyond the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. The appeal by the defendant is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.