The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the lower court’s sentencing (three years and six months of imprisonment) is unreasonable.

2. The determination of sentencing is based on the statutory penalty, based on the discretionary determination that takes place within a reasonable and appropriate scope by taking into account the factors constituting the conditions for sentencing as prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, and there is a unique area of the first deliberation in our criminal litigation law taking the trial-oriented principle and the principle of directness.

In addition to these circumstances, in light of the appellate court’s ex post facto and in-depth nature, it is reasonable to respect the sentencing in cases where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing in the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion. Although the sentence in the first instance falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, it is desirable to refrain from rendering a sentence without any difference between the first instance judgment and the first instance judgment solely on the ground that the sentence in the first instance falls within the opinion of the appellate court is somewhat different (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court sentenced the above sentence to the Defendant with due regard to the sentencing as stated in its reasoning. The circumstances favorable to the sentencing in the first instance judgment by the Defendant, such as the Defendant’s confession and not repeating the crime, are sufficiently considered while setting the sentence in the lower court, and the Defendant has been sentenced several times to the same kind of punishment and has completed the same kind of crime with the injury exceeding 20 million won.

It does not seem that there is no particular change in the conditions of sentencing in the trial, and thus, the sentencing of the court below is respected.