The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., 4,00,000 won of fine) of the lower court is too unreasonable.

Judgment

It is reasonable to respect the sentencing of the first instance court in cases 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, and to refrain from rendering a sentence that does not differ from the first instance court solely on the ground that the sentencing of the first instance court falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, although the sentence of the first instance court falls within the scope of discretion.

(Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In other words, the Defendant is highly likely to be subject to criticism in that he/she committed each of the crimes of this case without being aware of it during the period of repeated crime, and committed each of the crimes of this case.

However, the Defendant agreed with the victims of each of the instant crimes (in relation to the crime of causing property damage in the case No. 2019No. 74 of the original judgment, the Defendant agreed with the father of the victim I who is the actual owner of the vehicle), and such circumstance was already reflected in the judgment of sentencing of the lower court.

Therefore, it is difficult to evaluate that there exists a change in the sentencing conditions compared to the trial court and the court below. In full view of the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, various sentencing conditions as shown in the records, such as the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentencing of the court below is too unreasonable to be exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

Therefore, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since the defendant's appeal is groundless. It is so decided as per Disposition.

(However) In accordance with Article 25(1) of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure, the term “the application of the law” of the lower judgment is as follows: (i) the relevant provision of the law and the choice of punishment against the crime of 1.0, and (ii) the selection of fine from among the part of Defendant B’s “the selection of each fine,” and (iii) the deletion of “Article 35 of the Criminal Act, from