Judgment

The crime of this case is committed by the defendant while serving as a responsibility for delivering the staff of the singishing operations, and is committed by the defendant to obtain 15 million won from the damaged person, and the circumstances that are disadvantageous to the defendant, such as the fact that the crime was committed in light of the circumstances and the details of the crime, such as the method of the crime, are grave, are recognized.

However, it is reasonable to respect the defendant's confession of the crime of this case and reflects the defendant's mistake in depth, the crime of this case is committed in the attempted attempt, and there is no economic damage to the victim, and our Criminal Procedure Act, which adopts the trial-oriented principle and the principle of direct supervision, where there exists the unique area of the first deliberation as to the determination of sentencing, and there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance judgment, and the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The unfavorable circumstances against the recognized defendant do not fall under any special change in circumstances that can change the sentence of the court below after the sentence of the court below, and there is no other reason to see that the defendant's punishment is unfair because it is too uneasible to the defendant, considering the whole circumstances that form the conditions of sentencing as specified in the argument of this case, such as the defendant's age, sex, and environment.

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