The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the lower court (four years of imprisonment) on the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.

2. It is desirable to refrain from imposing a sentence without any difference in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court’s determination on the unfair argument of sentencing, if the sentencing of the first instance does not change in the conditions of sentencing, and if the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect them. Although the sentence of the first instance falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, it is somewhat different from the appellate court’s view, it is desirable to reverse the first instance judgment and impose a sentence without any difference from the first instance judgment (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In light of the aforementioned legal principles, it is desirable to refrain from imposing a sentence without any change in the original judgment and the sentencing conditions on the grounds that new sentencing data are not submitted in health class and the trial, and it appears to have been planned to run a crime immediately after the crime, and the defendant lives for about eight years from the date of the crime, even if the amount of deception is not a large amount, and thus, the defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive and consequence of the crime, etc.

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.