The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the court below (one year of imprisonment) on the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.

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, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The crime of this case is a case where the Defendant was placed in the cooling and freezing of the company where the Defendant was working and abandoned the body of a baby who died immediately after the delivery in the examination plastic sealing, and is likely to be subject to criticism by seriously infringing on the social morals and religious sentiment of the deceased, which is the protected legal interest of the crime of this case.

Although the Defendant committed the instant crime in the state of confusion due to the fear that a parent could have known of pregnancy, concerns about economic difficulties, and a confusion due to the Amins childbirth, the Defendant did not receive hospital treatment during the pregnancy period, and did not notify the male-child-child of pregnancy even though the relationship with the male-child is maintained, there is no circumstance to consider the circumstances in the course of committing the crime.

There is no new change in circumstances that could change the sentence of the court below in the trial, and taking into account the sentencing conditions, such as the defendant's age, living environment, motive of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, even if the defendant was the initial offender, the punishment imposed by the court below is not heavy and is done within the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. Therefore, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.