The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor) of the lower court 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). Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared with the lower court’s failure to submit new sentencing data at the trial and the lower court. In full view of the factors revealed in the argument in the instant case, the lower court’s sentencing is too excessive and so it does not seem that the lower court exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal by the defendant is groundless. It is so decided as per

(However) In accordance with Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, the judgment of the court below shall be made ex officio, pursuant to Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, ① Article 15 of the Road Traffic Act of the 12th 17th 12th 'Road Traffic Act' shall be corrected as ‘Article 152 of the Road Traffic Act'; ② Article 230 of the Criminal Act shall be corrected as ‘Article 239 of the Criminal Act'; ② Article 38(1)2 of the 13th 12th 'Article 38(2) shall be added by mistake.