The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor and six months, additional collection) of the lower court 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 them. Although the sentence of the first instance falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, it is desirable to reverse the judgment of the first instance court solely on the ground that it is somewhat different from the opinion of the appellate court, and to refrain from imposing a sentence that does not differ from

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, even though the Defendant: (a) led all the facts charged that the Defendant had denied at the trial before, it is difficult to see that the Defendant’s punishment was a reason to reduce the punishment of the lower court by taking into account the relationship of evidence; and (b) there is no other change of circumstances that could reduce the punishment of the lower court in the trial.

(1) According to the fact-finding reply to the Commissioner of the Daegu Provincial Police Agency at the trial, the defendant stated that he had observed the transaction of narcotics to another person, but the case was closed due to insufficient evidence, and the response to the fact-finding request by the head of the Seoul Western Police Agency to the fact-finding shall not be deemed to have any new special circumstances or changes in circumstances that are favorable to the sentencing of the defendant, since there was no fact-finding cooperation from the defendant. In full view of these circumstances and various sentencing conditions specified in the records and arguments, the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable, and thus, it is reasonable to respect the sentencing of the court below.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is not accepted.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, since there is no ground for appeal.