2. The judgment of the Defendant has five or more times of criminal acts related to violence, and in particular, the Defendant did not know about the fact that he/she committed each of the crimes of this case during the suspended execution period without being sentenced to one year of the suspended execution for a period of six months due to interference with business by the Daejeon District Court on March 23, 2017, and committed each of the crimes of this case during the suspended execution period, although he/she reflects his/her mistake, he/she has no choice to suspect the authenticity in light of the criminal records,

However, in full view of the following factors: (a) the Defendant recognized all of the instant crimes; (b) the degree of the instant assault is not relatively more severe; and (c) the agreement with the victim of the instant crime; and (d) other factors favorable to the Defendant, such as the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive and consequence of the instant crime; and (b) all the sentencing conditions specified in the records and arguments, including the circumstances before and after the instant crime, the sentence imposed by the lower court is

It is difficult to see it.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed pursuant to Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition (Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act in the column for “application of the law” of the lower judgment.

1. Provisional Payment Order: Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is apparent to have been omitted, and thus, it is corrected to add it pursuant to Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure.