The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the original court’s determination on the unfair argument of sentencing, and the sentencing of the original court is not beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, it shall be respected (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In this case, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the original court’s determination because the new materials of sentencing were not submitted in this case.

In addition, in full view of the sentencing conditions indicated in the records and pleadings, such as the fact that the Defendant had been sentenced two times of suspended execution and two times of punishment for the same crime, and that the nature of the crime of this case is bad, and that the amount of philophones handled by the Defendant is not large, it cannot be said that the lower court’s punishment against the Defendant is excessively unreasonable and beyond the reasonable scope of discretion.

Defendant’s assertion that the sentence of the court below is unreasonable is rejected.

2. Conclusion, the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed for lack of grounds.