The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

An application filed by an applicant for compensation shall be dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable in its summary of the grounds for appeal.

2. The Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the direct principle, has the unique area of the first instance court as to the determination of sentencing. As such, in a case where 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,

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, there is no particular change in the sentencing conditions compared to the lower court’s judgment, and comprehensively taking account of the various sentencing conditions revealed in the proceedings of the instant case, the lower court’s sentencing cannot be deemed to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion because the sentencing of the lower court is too unreasonable.

3. The applicant filed an application for compensation at the lower court. The lower court rejected the said application for compensation on the ground that the scope of liability for compensation is unclear, and the same objection or re-application is not allowed (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Do14383, Jan. 23, 2014). Accordingly, it is intended to dismiss the application for compensation by the applicant for compensation.

4. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is without merit and is dismissed pursuant to Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the application for compensation by the compensation orderer is dismissed pursuant to Article 32 (1) 1, 3, and (4) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings. It is so decided as per Disposition.