The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The court below rejected the application for compensation by the applicant for compensation by the court below, and pursuant to Article 32 (4) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, the applicant for compensation cannot file an objection against the judgment dismissing the application for compensation. Thus, the part dismissing the application for compensation order is immediately determined and excluded from the scope of the judgment of the court.

2. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) by the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

3. In a case where there is no change in the terms and conditions of sentencing compared to 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 such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In the first instance court, there is no change in the terms and conditions of sentencing compared to the lower court since new materials for sentencing have not been submitted in the trial court. In full view of all the reasons for sentencing as stated by the lower court and the reasons for sentencing as indicated in the instant records and the trial process, it is not recognized that the lower court’s sentencing was too excessive and exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is not accepted.

4. 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. It is so decided as per Disposition.