The sentencing of the lower court (one hundred months of imprisonment, three years of probation, three years of probation and pharmacologic treatment, confiscation, and collection) is deemed to be too uncomfortable and unfair.

Judgment

Even before the crime of this case was committed, the Defendant did not reflect the fact that he had been subject to criminal punishment more than twice in total, including that he was punished twice as the same crime, and committed the crime of this case. However, even though the Defendant had the same record as the Defendant during the confession of all of the crime of this case, the Defendant has no same record for about 10 years prior to the previous crime of this case, and the crime of this case is being kept in a relatively small amount of penphones, which are relatively less than a simple medication and a relatively small amount of penphones, in consideration of the motive and background of the crime of this case, circumstances after the crime of this case, Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, etc., and other various circumstances, which are the conditions for sentencing as shown in the records and arguments of this case, the sentencing of the court below is too unjustifiable.

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 groundless. It is so decided as per Disposition.