The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

RH (2019 early 677), RI (2019 early 762), among compensation orders issued by the lower court.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

The punishment of the court below (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

The Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the direct principle as to the grounds for appeal by the defendant, has its own inherent area in the sentencing of the first instance, and there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the first instance court’s sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). There is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the original judgment as the new sentencing materials have not been submitted at the trial court. In full view of all the reasons for sentencing indicated in the record of the instant case, the lower court’s sentencing is too remote, and thus, cannot be deemed to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. According to the court below's ex officio determination as to the order for compensation, the RH (No. 21,2019 early 677), RI (the list No. 89,2019 early 762), RJ (the list No. 95,2019 early 773), RK (the list No. 113,2019 early 799), RL (the list No. 121,2019 early 815), RM (the list No. 151, 2019 early 849), RM (the list No. 151,2019 early 849), and RN (the list No. 172,2019 initial 890), since it is not reasonable to set the amount of damage compensation No. 2961 in the court below's order for compensation as stated in the list No. 2999 of the first 2019 initial 890).

4...