A. The sentence of the lower court (2 million won of a fine) is too unhued and unjust.

B. The instant crime is attributable to the mental disorder of the Defendant and the applicant for medical treatment and custody (hereinafter “Defendant”), and as the Defendant continues to receive medical treatment while continuing to commit a crime, it cannot prevent re-offending. As such, even though the need for medical treatment is recognized, the lower court rejected the instant application for medical treatment and custody by misunderstanding the facts or misapprehending the legal doctrine.

2. Determination

A. In full view of all the sentencing factors indicated in the pleadings, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, victims and the Defendant’s relationship, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc., it is difficult to deem that the sentence of the lower court to the extent that it is unreasonable to the extent that it is considerably unreasonable because the sentence of the lower court is too uneasible.

B. Examining the circumstances in the judgment below in light of the records of this case, it is proper to acknowledge and determine the facts of the court below that it is difficult to conclude that the defendant has the necessity to receive medical treatment or the risk of re-offending at a medical treatment and custody facility, and there is no illegality as the prosecutor

3. Since the appeal by the prosecutor in conclusion is without merit, it is dismissed in entirety pursuant to Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act and Article 51 of the Medical Treatment and Custody Act. It is so decided as per Disposition