The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the court below (three years and 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). Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, the circumstances alleged by the Defendant as an element of sentencing were revealed and sufficiently considered during the hearing of the lower court. Since new sentencing data was not submitted in the trial after the lower court’s sentence, there was no change in the sentencing conditions compared with the lower court’s judgment, and the sentencing factors indicated in the proceedings of the instant case, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive for committing a crime, and circumstances after committing a crime, are comprehensively taken into account, the lower court’s sentencing is too excessive and does not seem to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

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 since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.