The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the court below (one year and three months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the judgment of 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, various circumstances, such as the following: (a) the Defendant’s agreement with the victims claiming sentencing factors in the trial of the lower court, were revealed in the hearing process and sufficiently considered; and (b) there is no particular change of circumstances in the matters subject to sentencing after the lower judgment was sentenced.

In addition, considering the sentencing factors indicated in the proceedings of the instant case, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive for committing the crime, and circumstances after committing the crime, the sentencing of the lower court does not seem to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, as it is too too 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 as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.