The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal: The lower court’s imprisonment (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the judgment of 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, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court appears to have sentenced to the least sentence of discretionary mitigation, taking full account of the favorable circumstances for the Defendant, as stated in the grounds for sentencing. In full view of the records of the instant case and various sentencing conditions against the Defendant, the lower court did not seem to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, and there is no change in the new sentencing conditions that can be deemed unfair to maintain the lower court’s sentence in the trial.

Therefore, it is not recognized that the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable because it is too large.

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

[However, ex officio in accordance with Article 25 (1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, the application of the law of the judgment of the court below to the second sentence (the point of a driving without a license) shall be corrected as "(the point of a driving without a license)", and the third sentence "(the point of a driving without a license)" shall be corrected as "(the point of a driving without a license)."