The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the summary of the grounds for appeal (the completion of a sexual assault treatment program for 10 months and 40 hours) is too unreasonable.

2. The determination of sentencing is based on statutory penalty, and the discretionary determination is made within a reasonable and reasonable scope, taking into account the factors constituting the conditions for sentencing prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act.

However, considering the unique area of sentencing of sentencing of the first instance that is respected under the principle of trial priority and the principle of direct jurisdiction taken by our criminal litigation law and the nature of the ex post facto review of the appellate court, the sentencing of sentencing of the first instance was exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion when comprehensively taking into account the factors and guidelines for sentencing specified in the first instance sentencing trial process.

In light of the records newly discovered in the course of the appellate court’s sentencing hearing, it is reasonable to file an unfair judgment of the first instance court, only in cases where it is deemed unfair to maintain the sentencing of the first instance court as it is for the court to judge the sentencing of the first instance court.

In the absence of such exceptional circumstances, it is desirable to respect the sentencing of the first instance judgment (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, the circumstances alleged by the Defendant as an element favorable to sentencing in the trial of a party were already revealed in the hearing process of the lower court, and there is no particular change in the situation in the sentencing guidelines and matters that are the conditions of sentencing after the sentence of the lower court was rendered.

In this context, the lower court committed the Defendant’s age, sex behavior, environment, and crime on April 7, 2016, when the Defendant was sentenced to a course of sexual assault treatment for 2 years and 6 months of imprisonment, 3 years of suspended execution, and 40 hours of imprisonment on April 7, 2016 on the ground that the Defendant committed a crime of indecent act on the street while under the influence of alcohol (the Defendant committed a crime of indecent act on the street while under the influence of alcohol).