The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (two years of imprisonment with prison labor for a period of six months suspended execution, forty hours of attending violent therapy, and eight hours of social service) that the court below made 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 Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared with the lower court’s failure to submit new sentencing data at the trial, and the sentencing factors expressed in the proceedings of the instant case, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive for committing an offense, and circumstances after committing an offense, the lower court’s sentencing cannot be deemed to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, by comprehensively taking account of the following as a whole.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

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