The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor for up to six months) of the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. The determination of sentencing is based on the statutory penalty, with a discretionary determination that takes place within a reasonable and appropriate scope, taking into account the factors constituting the conditions for sentencing prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, based on which our Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the principle of directness, has a unique area of the first instance trial regarding the

In addition, considering these circumstances and the ex post facto nature of the appellate court, it is reasonable to respect the sentencing conditions in the event that 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, and to refrain from rendering a sentence that does not differ from the first instance court on the sole ground that the sentence of the first instance falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, even though the sentence of the first instance court is somewhat different from the opinion of the appellate court.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). The lower court, based on its stated reasoning, sentenced the Defendant to the said punishment.

The circumstances cited by the Defendant as the grounds for appeal are already factors that have sufficiently taken into account while determining the punishment in the original judgment. There are no special circumstances or changes in circumstances that may be newly considered after the pronouncement of the original judgment.

Although the defendant acknowledges and reflects the crime of this case, there are favorable circumstances such as the fact that there is no criminal record of the defendant and there is no record of punishment exceeding the fine due to the crime of this type, considering the fact that the crime of this case committed to raise money for gambling, the motive and nature of the crime is not good, and the amount of damage caused by the crime of this case is not substantial, and even if considerable time has elapsed from the date of the crime, the damage has not been recovered, it is inevitable to make a strict punishment against the defendant, and the judgment of the court below is reasonable.