The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the reasons for appeal (six months of imprisonment) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared to the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, the appellate court is reasonable to respect the sentencing of the first instance court.

(Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015, etc.). In the instant case, compared to the lower court’s judgment, there is no particular change in the sentencing conditions (the victim of a crime of violation of the Fair Debt Collection Act, submitted to the lower court an application for a written and a written non-written application stating that “the victim would have sought to the highest preference against the defendant because he/she had taken advantage of the defendant,” and that “the victim would not want punishment against the defendant.” However, considering the fact that the lower court agreed with the victim, it is difficult to regard it as a change in circumstances to the extent that the sentence of the lower court would be mitigated, in light of the fact that the lower court explained the favorable circumstances in the above victim’s agreement with the victim, it cannot be deemed that the Defendant’s age and happiness environment, relationship with the victim, details and details of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence of the lower court is too unreasonable.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the conclusion is groundless.