The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the lower court’s punishment (one year of imprisonment and six million won of additional collection) is too unreasonable.

2. In our criminal litigation law, which takes the principle of court-oriented trials and the principle of direct determination, there exists a unique area of the first instance judgment regarding sentencing. In addition, in light of the ex post facto and aesthetic nature of the appellate court, it is reasonable to respect the first instance judgment if there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance judgment, and the first instance judgment does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion. Although the first instance judgment falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, it is desirable to refrain from imposing a sentence that differs from the first instance judgment on the sole ground that the first instance judgment is somewhat different from the appellate court’s opinion (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court did not change the terms and conditions of sentencing compared to the lower court’s subsequent sentencing because new data on sentencing were not submitted in the first instance trial, and the lower court did not have any reasonable change in the terms and conditions of sentencing compared to the lower court’s recommendation to establish the sentencing guidelines in this case, including the record and frequency of offenses.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.