2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and where the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). As new sentencing data was not submitted at the trial, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the lower court’s judgment, and the circumstances in which the prosecutor claims the grounds for sentencing are alleged as unfair, are deemed to have already been reflected in the grounds for sentencing of the lower court. The Defendant appears to have committed a crime, and the Defendant appears to have committed a crime more than a fine, the Defendant has no record of punishment for the same kind of crime, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, criminal conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s sentencing is deemed to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, and thus, is not deemed unfair.

The prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

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