The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor for six months) 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 on the sole ground that it is somewhat different from the opinion of the appellate court, and to refrain from imposing a sentence that does not differ

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). The fact that the Defendant acknowledges and reflects his/her mistake, the Defendant subscribed to a comprehensive motor vehicle insurance, and the fact that the victims agreed with the victims are favorable to the Defendant.

On the other hand, in light of the background and method of the crime, there is a bad character of the crime, the history of punishment including imprisonment for the same and a different kind of crime, and in particular, there is a lack of compliance consciousness, such as repeated committing the crime of this case during the period of repeated crime due to the same crime and the suspended execution period due to the same crime, and it is judged that the risk of repeating the crime of this case is high, and that there is a little number of victims are disadvantageous to the defendant

Therefore, the court below determined the punishment within a reasonable scope by fully taking into account all the circumstances regarding the sentencing of the defendant, and there is no circumstance that can be newly considered in the trial.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the various circumstances, such as the motive and means of the crime and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentencing of the court below cannot be deemed to be so excessive that the sentencing of the court below goes beyond the reasonable scope of discretion.

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.