The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the reasons for appeal (the imprisonment of six months and the fine of three hundred thousand won) is too unreasonable.

2. Under our criminal litigation law, which takes the principle of court-oriented trials and the principle of direct determination, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and where the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect the determination of sentencing (Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). The defendant shows an attitude to recognize and reflect each of the of the crimes in this case. The defendant shows an attitude at the investigation stage, the defendant agreed with the victim of the traffic accident and did not want criminal punishment against the defendant. However, the court below appears to have determined the punishment against the defendant in light of all the above circumstances, and there is no change in circumstances that may be considered after the sentence of the court below, and the defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment for up to 2 years on June 1, 2016 for a violation of the Traffic Act (driving) and was sentenced to a suspended sentence of 2 years on June 1, 2016.

9. In full view of the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive and circumstance of each of the instant crimes, means and method of each of the instant crimes, and all of the sentencing factors in the process of trial and records, including the circumstances after the crime was committed, even though the said judgment became final and conclusive, the Defendant committed each of the instant crimes during the period of probation, and the Defendant had a history of being subject to criminal punishment several times due to a violation of traffic laws (unlicensed driving) on the road, etc., it is not deemed that the sentence imposed by the lower court exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, or

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.