2. The judgment of this case is that the crime of this case committed by the Defendants was committed by the victims in the next table bble and contingently, and the victims did not have any particular situation due to the crime of this case, the Defendants paid the full amount of the agreement determined through the civil conciliation case to the victims, Defendant A was a first offender with no previous criminal record, Defendant B was sentenced three times due to drinking driving, etc., but there was no different criminal record from the other criminal record, and the Defendants’ whole reflects the conditions for sentencing, such as the age and happiness environment of the Defendants. In full view of all, it is not unreasonable to deem that the sentence imposed by the lower court against the Defendants is too unreasonable. Accordingly, the Prosecutor’s assertion is not acceptable.

3. Accordingly, 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.