The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the lower judgment (two years of imprisonment) 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 trial (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court rendered the above sentence to the Defendant with due regard to the sentencing stated in its reasoning. The lower court: (a) the Defendant led to the instant crime due to his/her confessions and reflects on the facts charged; (b) the Defendant’s livelihood is difficult after his/her release; (c) some of the damaged goods have already been returned to the victims; and (d) the fact that the damaged goods have already been returned to the victims is sufficiently considered by the lower court’

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the fact that the Defendant was punished for the same kind of crime, and that the Defendant committed a crime during the period of the same repeated crime, the lower court’s determination of sentencing exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

shall not be deemed to exist.

In addition, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing in the court.

If so, the court below's sentencing should be respected.