The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. It is reasonable to respect the sentencing conditions compared to the judgment of the first instance court where there is no change in the sentencing conditions, and where the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court determined the sentence against the Defendant by comprehensively taking into account the circumstances favorable to the Defendant (such as the Defendant’s confession of a crime and the absence of other criminal records than the same criminal records) and unfavorable circumstances (the fact that the Defendant was sentenced to the suspension of the execution of imprisonment for the same crime, even when the Defendant was sentenced to the suspension of the execution of imprisonment for the same crime, and there is no special circumstance or change in circumstances that may be newly considered in the sentencing after the sentence of the lower court is sentenced.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, motive, background, means and consequence of the commission of the crime, and the circumstances after the commission of the crime, the sentencing of the lower court exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, and thus, exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

It does not appear.

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