2. The judgment below set the sentence (10 million won) by taking into account the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant’s reflects the instant crime; (b) the health condition of the Defendant was not good; and (c) the Defendant was punished twice due to the violation of the Road Traffic Act (d) as well as the fact that the instant crime was committed without being among the persons during the period of suspension of execution due to the violation of the Road Traffic Act (d) and without being subject to the suspension of execution due to the violation of the Road Traffic Act (e.g., the Defendant’s age, sexual behavior, environment, motive and means of the instant crime; and (b) the circumstances after the crime, etc., as well as the various sentencing factors specified in the records

The grounds for unfair sentencing (the possibility of recidivism during the period of probation, etc.) alleged by the prosecutor are shown to have been sufficiently considered in determining the sentence against the defendant, and the above conditions of sentencing have changed otherwise.

There is no circumstance to see the above sentencing conditions, and considering the above sentencing conditions, the sentence of the court below is determined to be reasonable within the reasonable scope of discretion.

The 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 on the grounds that the appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.