For if by the one man’s offense death reigned through the one, much more those who receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ. (Romans 5:17)
Romans 5:17 concludes a parenthetical thought by Paul that runs from Romans 5:13-17.
He has discussed the role of sin and how terrible the consequences of sin - which entered the world through Adam - really are. However, Paul has shown that what comes through Christ is far superior to what entered the world through Adam.
The reign of death vs. the reign of life.
What comes through Jesus Christ is different and far superior to what comes through Adam.
From the action of the one (Adam), sin was introduced into the world and “reigned” from that time until the action of the other (Christ) introduced a reign of grace. - Wacaster, Studies in Romans, 210
The death Paul is speaking about in these passages (Romans 5:13-17) is not referring to physical life and death but spiritual life and death.
Sin reigns from a spiritual graveyard while grace reigns in life. The life and death in these passages are not speaking of physical life and death. See verse 21. The whole discussion here, it seems to me, is one of spiritual condemnation and spiritual death. The blessing spoken of in verse 21 is eternal life. - McGuiggan, Romans, 171
Those who have received the “gift of righteousness” (as a result of their obedience) are privileged to “reign in life.” Rather than death having dominion over them, the hope of eternal life now rules their life. All such came “through the one, even Jesus Christ.” - Wacaster, Studies in Romans, 210
In Christ, you have eternal life. And what a blessing this is to those who have sinned and rightly deserve death (Romans 3:23; 6:23).
What Christ has done trumps Adam every time! The death/life dichotomy central to this verse is theologically important for Paul in other texts as well (see Romans 6:23; 7:10; 8:6, 38; 1 Corinthians 3:22; 2 Corinthians 2:16; 4:12; Philippians 1:20). - Pollard, Truth for Today Commentary, 184-185