2. The Korean Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the principle of directness, has a unique area for sentencing determination, and 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 it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In full view of the following: (a) there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the lower court’s given that there is no particular submission of new sentencing data in the trial; and (b) the reasons for sentencing revealed in the proceedings of the instant case (in particular, there was a history of having been punished three times for the same crime; and (c) the Defendant committed the instant crime during the period of suspension of execution, without being aware of the fact that he/she was sentenced to a suspended sentence for a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (i.e., the act of committing the instant crime) on May 31, 2018). The lower court’s sentencing is too excessive

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit.

(However, in accordance with Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, the phrase “17 km”, which reduces the column for criminal facts, shall be corrected to “5 km.”