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). The lower court, as stated in its reasoning, determined a punishment by taking into account favorable circumstances, such as the fact that the Defendant appears to have committed a crime by drinking, and that the Defendant has no record of punishment heavier than the fine, etc.

The circumstances alleged by the prosecutor on the grounds of appeal are already considered in the sentencing process of the court below, and there is no new change in circumstances that could change the sentence of the court below in the trial.

When comprehensively considering the sentencing conditions, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, etc. as shown in the arguments of the lower court and the lower court, the sentence imposed by the lower court is beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, or is too unjustifiable.

3. According to the conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition.