The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

2. Determination

A. In light of the fact that the sentencing based on the statutory penalty is a discretionary judgment that takes place within a reasonable and appropriate scope by comprehensively taking into account the matters that are the conditions for sentencing under Article 51 of the Criminal Act based on the statutory penalty, and the fact that the sentencing of the first instance court does not change the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and that the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect them. Although the first instance court’s sentencing falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, it is desirable to reverse the judgment of the first instance court and to refrain from imposing a sentence that does not differ from the first instance court on the grounds that

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). B.

As to the instant case, there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared with the original judgment because new sentencing data have not been submitted in the health team and the trial court, and in light of the method of the instant crime, the amount of damage, etc., the nature of the relevant crime is not less than that of the victim, and in full view of the sentencing factors revealed in the pleadings in the instant case, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, criminal records, criminal records, circumstances after the instant crime, etc., the sentencing of the lower court is too unreasonable, and thus, 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 on the ground that it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.