The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below against the defendant on the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the first instance court’s sentencing 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). The lower court appears to have determined the sentence by comprehensively taking into account all the favorable circumstances against the Defendant, and the circumstances alleged by the Defendant on the grounds of appeal, such as the fact that the circumstances favorable to the Defendant appear to have been economically and economically insufficient, are also reflected in the sentencing process of the lower court.

It is difficult to find out any change in special sentencing conditions that can change the sentence of the court below for the first time.

In light of the frequency, period, etc. of the crime of this case, the crime of this case is not good in light of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, family relationship, criminal history, motive, means and consequence of the crime; and (b) the sentencing conditions specified in the lower court and the oral argument after the crime; and (c) it is difficult to deem the Defendant’s punishment to be unfair on the grounds that the lower court’s punishment is excessively excessive beyond the reasonable scope of its discretion.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal of this case is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.