The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable in view of the following: (a) the Defendant was committed by the instant crime; (b) the Defendant was committed against the Defendant in depth; (c) the degree of damage is relatively minor; and (d) the victim was not punished against the Defendant.

2. The current Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the principle of trial-oriented and directness, has the unique area of the first instance court with respect to the determination of sentencing. As such, it is reasonable to respect the determination of sentencing in the 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, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court appears to have determined the sentence by sufficiently taking into account the above favorable circumstances alleged in the first instance court. In so doing, considering the Defendant’s criminal power and the fact that there is no special change of circumstances that the lower court should change its punishment after the sentence of the lower court, the lower court is not recognized to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion because the judgment of the lower court is too large, considering all the factors indicated in the records of the instant case, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, motive, motive, means and consequence of the crime

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