The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal (the imprisonment of six months, the suspension of execution of two years, the observation of protection, and the order to attend violence treatment lectures of forty hours) is too unreasonable.

2. It is desirable to refrain from rendering a sentence that does not change the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and where the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect them. Although the sentence of the first instance court falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to refrain from rendering a sentence that does not vary with the first instance court on the sole ground that the difference between the opinion of the appellate court and the opinion of the appellate court (Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In accordance with the foregoing legal doctrine, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the original court on the grounds that new materials were not submitted in the trial and that the sentencing of the first instance court is too excessive and it is not recognized that the sentencing of the lower court exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion in full view of all the reasons for sentencing presented by the lower court.

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.