Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The sentence imposed by the lower court (two years of imprisonment) on the summary of the grounds for appeal 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 Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015 (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court determined a punishment by taking into account the following: (a) the Defendant’s history of having been sentenced three times to punishment due to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, etc. of Specific Crimes (i.e., the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes) and (ii) the history of having been punished for the same criminal acts (i.e., several times); (b) the Defendant committed each of the larceny crimes in the instant case as long as he/she did not know even during the period of repeated crime; (c) the victims did not agree; and (d) the Defendant made an interview with the victim: (d) the Defendant’s confession of most of the instant
Considering the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, motive and background of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc. as revealed in the oral arguments at the lower court and the party hearing, the sentence imposed by the lower court is not hot, as it takes place within the reasonable scope of discretion.
3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.