The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

An applicant for compensation shall be dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor for up to eight months) imposed by the court below is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court’s determination on the grounds of appeal, and the sentencing of the first instance court is not beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In light of the records and arguments in this case, there is no change of circumstances that may consider the sentencing after the lower judgment, and considering the various sentencing conditions as shown in the records and arguments, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable and does not seem to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, even if the circumstances alleged by the Defendant as grounds for appeal are considered.

B. According to the records of this case as to the application for compensation, the applicant for compensation can recognize the fact that he applied for a compensation order on January 21, 2020, which was after the argument of this case was concluded. Thus, the application for compensation by the applicant for compensation is unlawful.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit, and since the application for compensation by the applicant for compensation is inappropriate, it is decided to dismiss it under Articles 32 (1) 1 and 26 (1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings. It