The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the judgment of the court below (unfair sentencing) is too unreasonable.

2. The sentencing on the basis of a statutory penalty is a discretionary judgment that takes into account the factors constituting the conditions for sentencing prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act within a reasonable and appropriate scope, on the basis of the statutory penalty.

However, considering the unique area of sentencing in the first instance that is respected under the principle of trial priority and the principle of direct jurisdiction in our criminal litigation law and the nature of the ex post facto review of the appellate court, the first instance sentencing judgment exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion when comprehensively considering the factors and sentencing criteria in the course of the first instance sentencing trial.

In light of the records newly discovered in the course of the appellate court’s sentencing hearing, it is reasonable to file an unfair judgment of the first instance court, only in cases where it is deemed unfair to maintain the sentencing of the first instance court as it is for the court to judge the sentencing of the first instance court.

Unless there exist such exceptional circumstances, it is desirable to respect the sentencing of the first instance judgment (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court sentenced the above sentence to the Defendant with due regard to the sentencing stated in its reasoning. The circumstances cited by the Defendant as grounds for appeal are as follows: (a) the Defendant appears to have led to confession and reflect against the Defendant; (b) the damage amount caused by the instant crime is not large; (c) part of the damage was returned; (d) some of the victims did not want criminal punishment against the Defendant; and (e) the Defendant’s family relationship, etc. are considered in determining the sentencing in its entirety.

In addition, considering the motive of the instant crime, the details and method of intrusion, and the circumstances after the instant crime, which can be recognized by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the Defendant is liable at the time of the instant crime.