The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Where there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared to the lower court’s judgment as to the Defendant’s unfair argument of sentencing, and the sentencing of the lower court is not beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, it shall be respected (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The sentencing elements asserted by the Defendant have already been examined in the course of pleadings in the lower court, and the lower court appears to have sufficiently considered the determination of the Defendant’s punishment.

Since the new sentencing data was not submitted, there is no particular change in the sentencing conditions compared with the original judgment.

In addition, the defendant murdered the victim, who has been living together for a long time due to her pain.

As a result, it is difficult to measure the suffering of the victim who has lost a precious life, and the victim's children are also suffering from extreme mental shock and slickness.

In full view of such circumstances and various conditions of sentencing as indicated in the records and arguments of this case, even if considering all circumstances favorable to the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant has led to the confession of all crimes in this court, no criminal record exceeding the fine, and the victim of damage and fire prevention does not want the punishment of the defendant, it cannot be deemed that the sentencing of the court below is excessively unreasonable and beyond the reasonable scope of discretion.

Defendant’s assertion disputing the propriety of sentencing in the lower court is not accepted.

2. Conclusion, the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed for lack of grounds.