The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (an amount of KRW 1.5 million) is too unreasonable.

2. It is desirable to refrain from rendering a sentence that does not change the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, if the first instance court did not change the conditions of sentencing, and if the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect them. Although the sentence of sentencing of the first instance falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to refrain from rendering a sentence that does not vary with the first instance court on the sole basis of the fact that the opinion of the appellate court differs from the opinion of the appellate court (Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In accordance with the foregoing legal doctrine, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the lower court on the ground that new sentencing materials have not been submitted in the first instance court, and there was no change in the conditions of sentencing (the Defendant submitted to the victim D on July 7, 2016 at the first instance court, which was paid in consideration of the fact that the Defendant subscribed to a comprehensive insurance policy.

In full view of all of the reasons for sentencing as stated by the lower court, the lower court’s sentencing is so excessive that it exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

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.