The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below against the defendant on the summary of the grounds for appeal 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 such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court, as indicated in its reasoning, determined the punishment by comprehensively taking into account the circumstances favorable to the Defendant and the unfavorable circumstances, including the fact that the Defendant recognized the crime, and the fact that the economic situation is not adequate, are already reflected in the sentencing process of the lower court.

It is difficult to find out any change in special sentencing conditions that can change the sentence of the court below for the first time.

Considering the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, family relation, criminal records, motive, means and consequence of a crime, etc., as well as various circumstances, which form the conditions for sentencing as shown in the lower court and the oral argument after the crime, the lower court’s punishment against the Defendant cannot be deemed as being too unfair because it goes beyond the reasonable scope of its discretion.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

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