The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor) of the lower court 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, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). A favorable circumstance is that the Defendant is both aware of each of the instant crimes and is against the law.

However, there are no circumstances to deem that the Defendant committed each of the instant crimes without being aware of the fact that he/she had been punished several times due to violent crimes, in particular, even though he/she was in the period of suspension of execution due to special injury, fraud, etc., and that he/she did not have any circumstance to deem that he/she did not agree with the victims and endeavored to recover from damage.

The court below determined punishment in consideration of all the above circumstances, and there is no change in the sentencing conditions different from those of the court below in the judgment following the pronouncement of the court below.

In addition, taking into account the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, etc., and all the sentencing factors indicated in the records and arguments, the lower court’s punishment cannot be deemed to be unfair because it goes beyond the reasonable scope of discretion.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.