The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the summary of the grounds for appeal (4 million won of a fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Unless the first instance court’s determination of sentencing is deemed to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, or the first instance court’s determination of sentencing is deemed to have been inappropriate in full view of the newly discovered materials in the appellate court’s appellate court’s determination of sentencing, it is reasonable to respect the first instance court’s determination of sentencing, unless there exist circumstances such as deeming that

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, the circumstances alleged by the Defendant as an element of sentencing were already revealed and sufficiently considered during the pleadings of the lower court, and there was no new circumstance that could change the sentence of the lower court in the trial. No new circumstance was found in the lower court’s trial, and the Defendant’s confessions and confessions against the unfavorable circumstances, such as the fact that there are many criminal records, and the Defendant voluntarily requested the bank to suspend payment, and other favorable circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, motive and process of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., and all of the sentencing factors indicated in the instant records and arguments, such as the record and arguments, are considered, and the sentencing of the lower court is too excessive, and thus, cannot be deemed to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.