The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the lower court (six months of imprisonment, confiscation) on the summary of the reasons for appeal is too unreasonable.

2. There is no change in the terms and conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and where the sentencing of the first instance 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). Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared with the lower court on the grounds that new materials for sentencing have not been submitted in the trial, and in full view of the factors revealed in the arguments in the instant case, the lower court’s sentencing was too too excessive and exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

It does not appear.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. As such, the Defendant’s appeal is without merit, and is dismissed pursuant to Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by the lower court (Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act: Provided, That the Defendant is a person who is under the suspension of execution as of December 7, 2016, and is in the period of suspension of execution.

[2] Article 25(1) of the Regulations on Criminal Procedure provides that “The crime committed by himself/herself” was added to mistake and that “the crime committed by himself/herself is a clerical error in the name of his/her own criminal act,” and such deletion and correction are made ex officio in accordance with Article 25(1) of the Regulations on Criminal Procedure.”