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, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court determined a punishment in consideration of the following: (a) although the Defendant committed the instant crime without being aware of his/her fault during the repeated crime due to fraud, the Defendant committed the instant crime without being aware of it; (b) he/she committed a mistake; and (c) he/she did not have any record of being punished for the same kind of crime; and (d) there was no change

In addition, comprehensively taking into account various sentencing conditions, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, background of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, as shown in the argument of the court below and the party hearing, the sentence imposed by the court below is given within the reasonable scope of discretion, and is not easy.

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