The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment) by the lower court (e., five months) 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 sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared with the lower court’s failure to submit new sentencing data to the Defendant in the trial, and the lower court did not appear to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, even when comprehensively considering the factors revealed in the arguments in the instant case including various circumstances considered in sentencing.

In particular, while considering the fact that the possibility of recidivism seems to be high in light of the form of crime and the power of punishment, the lower court determined the sentence against the Defendant by taking into account the following factors: (a) the Defendant’s reflection and agreement with the victim; and (b) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment and circumstances; and (c) the circumstances favorable to the sentencing claimed by the Defendant and his defense counsel in the trial are deemed to have been sufficiently taken into account

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

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