2. The instant crime committed by the Defendant was committed by intrusion on another person’s house through the window open at night at night, thereby stealinging the goods, and the nature of the crime was bad, and did not reach an agreement with the victim, and the fact that the damage was not recovered is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

On the other hand, the fact that the amount of damage from the crime of this case is not significant to KRW 5,80,000, and there is no record that the defendant was punished as a suspended sentence or a crime of the same kind, and that the defendant seems to have caused the crime of this case due to difficulties in living is favorable to the defendant.

In full view of the aforementioned circumstances and other factors of sentencing as indicated in the instant records and arguments, including the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, background of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s sentence that sentenced six months of imprisonment is too uneasible and thus, cannot be deemed unfair.

Therefore, we cannot accept the prosecutor's unfair argument of sentencing.

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.