2. The lower court, under the favorable circumstances in which the Defendant led to the confession and reflect of the crime, and the victim did not want the punishment of the Defendant, determined a sentence by taking account of the circumstances unfavorable to the Defendant, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive and means of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., and other various sentencing conditions as shown in the records and arguments, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, criminal conduct, environment, motive and means of the crime, etc.

In light of the characteristics of the place of emergency room, the role of emergency medical service workers, etc., the case is serious, and the defendant has a number of criminal records of the same kind of violence and the crime of this case is also poor due to recidivism during the period of repeated crime) appears to have been determined by the court below, which has already considered sufficient factors in determining the punishment against the defendant, and the above change in the sentencing condition was otherwise changed.

There is no circumstance to see the above sentencing conditions, and considering the above sentencing conditions, the sentence of the court below is determined to be reasonable within the reasonable scope of discretion.

The prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

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