The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the reasons for appeal (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. In light of the fact that the sentencing is based on the statutory penalty, taking into account the factors constituting the conditions for the sentencing prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act within a reasonable and appropriate scope, and the fact that the sentencing is determined within an appellate court’s ex post facto nature, etc., it is reasonable to respect the sentencing conditions in a case where there is no change in the conditions for the sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of the discretion. Although the sentencing of the first instance falls within the reasonable scope of the discretion, it is desirable to reverse the judgment of the first instance on the sole ground that the sentence of the first instance falls within the scope of the discretion, and to refrain from sentencing that does not differ from the appellate court’s view (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015).

In full view of the factors revealed in the proceedings of the instant case, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, the background and motive leading up to the instant crime, the circumstances before and after the instant crime, and the record of the crime, the sentencing of the lower court is too unreasonable to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition (Article 37 (1) 2, Article 38 (2), and Article 50 of the Criminal Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is dismissed under the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, Article 38 (2), and Article 50 of the Criminal Act on the grounds that "Article 37 of the Criminal Act on the grounds that Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, Article 38 (2), and Article 50 of the Criminal Act on the grounds that Article 364 (3) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is punishable by imprisonment with prison labor on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is more severe. However, the lower court's