The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor for up to eight months and fines of up to 300,000 won) imposed by the court below is too unreasonable.

2. It is reasonable to respect the sentencing conditions compared to the judgment of the first instance court, if there is no change in the sentencing conditions, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, the lower court, based on the foregoing legal doctrine, determined the sentence by comprehensively taking account of the various circumstances as stated in its reasoning.

In light of the fact that the Defendant had committed each of the instant public performance and obscenity in the trial for the first time, it is difficult to view the above circumstances as changes in circumstances that could change the sentencing of the lower court in light of the fact that the Defendant made it clear that he had committed each of the instant public performance and obscenity even though it was committed, and that he had the victims testify from the court of the lower court by denying the crime, it is difficult to view the above circumstances as changes in circumstances that could change the sentencing of the lower court. Unlike the fact that there is no special circumstance to consider the new sentencing after the lower court’s judgment, the Defendant again committed the instant public performance and obscenity crime even though he had had been punished twice due to the crime of obscenity, and it seems that the victims would have suffered considerable mental shock, and the Defendant’s age, character, environment, circumstances, and circumstances after the crime, etc. were taken into account, the lower court’s sentencing is too excessive and it does not seem to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

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 without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.