2. In light of the fact that the Defendant was a primary offender, the Defendant appears to have committed each of the instant crimes by contingency while drinking alcohol, the Defendant agreed that the Defendant was a victim B and the victimized police officer E, the Defendant was fully aware of and in opposition to the Defendant’s mistake, and the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive and consequence of the crime, and other circumstances revealed in the instant pleadings, such as the circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too uneasible and it is not deemed unfair, and thus, the Prosecutor’s assertion is rejected.

3. The appeal by the prosecutor of the conclusion is without merit and is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.