2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the lower court’s judgment, and where the sentencing of the lower court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court determined the sentence against the Defendant by comprehensively taking account of the circumstances favorable to the Defendant and unfavorable conditions

The circumstances alleged by the prosecutor on the grounds of appeal (such as the fact that the access media leased by the defendant was abused for licensing and caused damage, the fact that strong punishment against the provider of the passbook is necessary to prevent the singishing crime, and the circumstances in this case and the nature of the crime) seems to have been already considered in the sentencing process of the court below.

In addition, there is no new change in circumstances that can change the sentence of the court below in the first instance court.

When comprehensively taking into account the sentencing conditions, such as the character, conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, as shown in the deliberation of the court below and the party concerned, the sentence of the court below is excessive beyond the reasonable scope of discretion and it cannot be deemed unfair.

3. 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.