The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence of the lower court against the accused (six 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 the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from 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 foregoing legal doctrine, the following circumstances are favorable to the Defendant: (a) the Defendant, while recognizing the instant crime, is against the Defendant.

However, since around 2011, the Defendant had been punished several times for the same crime while operating the instant fishing place in the state of unregistered registration. The instant crime was committed by a public official in charge of the operation of the fishing place without registration and removing and damaging a notice on the measure of closure of the fishing place, and the nature of the crime was very poor in light of the period and frequency of the crime. The new sentencing data was not submitted at the trial and there was no change in the sentencing conditions compared with the original judgment. In full view of all other circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s sentencing is unreasonable because it excessively goes beyond the reasonable scope of discretion.

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

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.