The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. In light of the following: (a) the gist of the grounds for appeal: (b) the confession and reflect of the Defendant; (c) the Defendant resulted in committing a crime to raise living expenses due to economic difficulties; and (d) the Defendant agreed with the victim C; and (c) efforts to agree with the remaining victims, the lower court’s imprisonment is too unreasonable.

2. The Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the direct principle, ought to respect the determination of sentencing in cases where there exists a unique area of the first instance court, and there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Even if the materials submitted in the trial at the trial, there is no significant change in the sentencing conditions compared to the original judgment, and comprehensively taking account of all the factors indicated in the records of this case, the lower court’s sentencing is too unreasonable to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.