The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the lower court (four months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the direct principle, has the unique area of the first instance court with respect to the determination of sentencing. As such, in a case where 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,

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, the lower court’s sentencing cannot be deemed to be excessively excessive and beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, and thus, cannot be deemed to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, in full view of the following: (a) the Defendant was found to have been aware of the change in circumstances to the extent to which the lower court’s sentencing should be changed; (b) the Defendant did not appear to have submitted new sentencing data in the trial; and (c) other various sentencing conditions indicated in the instant pleadings, such as the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, motive and background, means, and consequence of the crime; and (d) circumstances after the crime.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.