The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the court below (six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and 80 hours of community service) 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.

The Criminal Procedure Law of Korea, which takes the principle of trial-oriented and direct care, has the unique area of the first deliberation about the determination of sentencing.

In addition to these circumstances and the ex post facto in light of the nature of the appellate court’s ex post facto review, the first sentencing judgment exceeded the reasonable bounds of its discretion when comprehensively considering the conditions of sentencing as shown in the first sentencing review process and the sentencing guidelines, etc.

In cases where the appellate court recognizes that maintaining the sentencing of the first instance court is unfair in full view of the materials newly discovered in the course of the appellate court’s sentencing review, etc., the appellate court should reverse the judgment of the first instance court which was unfair. However, in cases where there are no changes in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court and the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect them (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court, on the grounds stated in its reasoning, sentenced the Defendant to six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence, and 80 hours of social service, on the basis of the reasons indicated in its reasoning.

The circumstances alleged by the defendant as an element favorable to sentencing in the court of the original instance have already been taken into account at the hearing of the original court, and there is no change in the sentencing conditions in comparison with the original court, since new sentencing materials have not been submitted at the trial of the original court.

The court below's reasons for sentencing are various other conditions, such as the defendant's age, sex, environment, motive, means and result of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime.