The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the fact that the sentencing based on the statutory penalty is a discretionary judgment that takes place within a reasonable and appropriate scope by comprehensively taking into account the matters that are the conditions for sentencing under Article 51 of the Criminal Act based on the statutory penalty, and the fact that the sentencing of the first instance court does not change the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and that the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it. Although the first instance court’s sentencing falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, it is desirable to reverse the judgment of the first instance court and to refrain from imposing a sentence that does not differ from the first instance court’s opinion on

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). B.

Even when considering the normal data submitted in the health room and the trial room as to the instant case, it is difficult to evaluate that there exists a change in the sentencing conditions compared with the original judgment. In full view of the sentencing factors revealed in the proceedings of the instant case including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, circumstances of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, it is difficult to determine that the sentencing of the lower court is too excessive to exceed the reasonable scope of discretion, and the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

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