The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the lower court’s punishment (4 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and where the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In light of the following, the lower court determined the sentence by comprehensively taking into account all the circumstances favorable to the Defendant and the unfavorable circumstances, the lower court did not change the sentencing conditions compared with the lower court’s judgment on the ground that the new sentencing data was not submitted in the trial, and there was no particular change in the sentencing conditions compared with the lower court’s judgment on the grounds that the sentencing of the lower court was too excessive and exceeded the scope of the reasonable sentencing discretion.

It does not seem that it does not appear.

Therefore, 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 grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

[Provided, however, the judgment of the court below on July 21, 201, "the defendant was sentenced to 10 months of imprisonment by the Changwon District Court on July 21, 2016 due to a violation of road traffic law (drinking) and was released on June 23, 2016 during the execution of the sentence, and the parole period passed on February 3, 2017.

“The Defendant was sentenced to ten months of imprisonment with labor for a violation of road traffic laws at the Changwon District Court on May 4, 2016, and was released on December 23, 2016 in a field prison on parole on December 3, 2016 and passed on February 3, 2017 during the execution of the sentence.

Inasmuch as it is apparent that the entry is a clerical error, ex officio correction shall be made in accordance with Article 25(1) of the Regulations on Criminal Procedure.