The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is as follows: The defendant is operating a medium-sized restaurant and is engaged in a farming business to support the elderly and his/her children.

Accordingly, the defendant is extremely difficult to complete the community service order and the lecture attendance order among the sentence of the court below (the probation of one year and six months, the community service order of 240 hours, the violence therapy of 40 hours).

The punishment sentenced by the court below 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, the new sentencing data is not submitted except for the written application submitted by the Defendant’s family members in the trial, and there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared with the lower court. The reason for sentencing alleged by the Defendant appears to have been sufficiently considered by the lower court in determining the punishment.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the following factors: Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, the background and motive leading up to the instant crime, and the circumstances before and after the instant crime, etc., the sentencing of the lower court cannot be deemed to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, as it is too unreasonable to determine the sentencing of the lower court.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the conclusion is groundless.