The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

An applicant for compensation shall be dismissed.

1. The lower court’s sentence against the Defendant on the summary of the grounds of appeal is too unreasonable.

2. It is desirable to refrain from rendering a sentence that does not change the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and where 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 court falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to refrain from rendering a sentence that does not vary with the first instance court on the sole ground that the difference between the opinion of the appellate court and the opinion of the appellate court (Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In accordance with the foregoing legal doctrine, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the original court on the grounds that new materials were not submitted in the trial and that the sentencing of the first instance court is too excessive and it is not recognized that the sentencing of the lower court exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion in full view of all the reasons for sentencing presented by the lower court.

Therefore, the defendant's argument of sentencing is not accepted.

3. In conclusion, the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the Defendant’s appeal is without merit. Since the scope of liability for compensation is not clear, the Defendant’s application for compensation is dismissed in accordance with Article 32(1)3 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, and thus, it is so decided as per Disposition.