The defendant's appeal as to the defendant's case is dismissed.

The judgment below

Among them, compensation order against D applicant for compensation in the court below.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal in light of the following: (a) the above victims are not subject to punishment by agreement with eight victims; (b) the defendant recognizes and reflects a crime; and (c) there are no criminal records exceeding fines, etc., the punishment of the lower judgment (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the direct principle as to the grounds for appeal, has the unique area of the first instance judgment as to the determination of sentencing, and 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 (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). Even when considering the circumstances agreed with the victim D in the first instance trial, there is a significant change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the lower court.

In full view of all the reasons for sentencing indicated in the records of the instant case, the lower court’s sentencing was so excessive that it exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

shall not be deemed to exist.

Therefore, the defendant's argument of sentencing is without merit.

3. In a case where the defendant, ex officio, filed an appeal against conviction regarding the part of the compensation order against D applicant for compensation to the court below, the compensation order is transferred to the appellate court along with the defendant case pursuant to Article 33(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, even if the defendant does not object to the compensation order, and thus, the part

According to Article 25 (3) 3 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, where the existence of liability for compensation or the scope thereof of the defendant is unclear, a compensation order shall not be issued, and in such a case, the application for a compensation order shall be dismissed pursuant to Article 32 (1) of the same Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 201Do714, Aug. 30, 2012). According to the records, the defendant has reached the trial of the court below, and the defendant has reached the trial of the party.