The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., 10 months of imprisonment) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the judgment of 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 in the appellate

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, the health class, the lower court determined the relevant punishment by comprehensively taking account of the various circumstances as stated in its reasoning, and submitted a written application for non-prosecution of the victim’s punishment in the trial. However, since the written application for non-prosecution of the victim was already submitted at the lower court and was considered to have sufficiently taken into account at the lower court, it is difficult to deem that a new circumstance exists to change the sentence of the lower court. Moreover, even if considering all of the sentencing factors indicated in the instant pleadings, such as the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, motive and means of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, it is difficult to deem that the lower court’

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is groundless.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal 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.