2. The instant crime against the grounds of appeal reveals that the Defendant: (a) opened the entrance of the restaurant operated by the victim at night and opened the entrance of the restaurant to be stolen by intrusion; and (b) opened the entrance of the cafeteria to be stolen by the victim; (c) the Defendant was the first offender and all of the instant crimes are recognized; (d) the Defendant was diagnosed of “serious mental retardation and serious behavioral disorder” as the physically handicapped in intelligence index 45 and mental retardation 2; and (e) the Defendant was diagnosed of “serious mental retardation and serious behavioral disorder.” The Defendant was deemed to have caused one of the above intellectual disorder in preventing the instant crime; (c) the instant crime was committed by the attempted crime and was committed without actual damage of the victim; and (d) comprehensively taking account of the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family relationship, circumstances leading to the instant crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., it is difficult to deem that the lower court’s punishment is excessively unreasonable.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

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