The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The lower court’s sentence (six months of imprisonment) against the Defendant on the summary of the grounds of appeal (unfair sentencing) is too unreasonable.

2. The lower court, on the other hand, determined the Defendant’s punishment by taking into account the following circumstances: (a) although there were favorable circumstances, such as the Defendant’s confession and reflect on the instant crime; (b) on the other hand, in light of the method and consequence of the instant crime, the nature of the crime is not somewhat weak; (c) the victim still wishes to punish the Defendant; (d) the Defendant has a very much history of having been sentenced to imprisonment or fines for violent crimes, including the crime of interference with the same kind of duties; and (e) the fact that the Defendant is a repeated offender of the same kind of crime, etc. before committing the instant crime; and (e) taking into account such circumstances and other various sentencing conditions, including the Defendant’s age

In full view of the fact that the grounds for sentencing alleged by the Defendant in the trial of the original instance appear to have been considered in the sentencing, there are no new circumstances to consider the sentencing after the pronouncement of the original judgment, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and where the first instance judgment does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). As such, it cannot be said that the sentence imposed by the lower court is unreasonable because the sentence imposed by the Defendant is unreasonable.

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.