2. The lower court, in light of the circumstances favorable to the Defendant’s confession and reflect of the crime, the victim does not want the punishment of the Defendant by mutual agreement with the victim, the crime or the crime for which punishment has become final during the period of probation is a dual-class crime, the Defendant’s protection observation and community service order is faithfully performed, and the Defendant committed the instant crime without being among the persons during the period of probation, and other factors of sentencing as indicated in the instant records and arguments, such as the Defendant’s age, sex behavior, environment, motive and means of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., were determined in consideration of various sentencing conditions as indicated in the instant records and arguments.

The grounds for unfair sentencing (the possibility of violence, crime during the period of probation, and recidivism) alleged by the prosecutor are shown to have been sufficiently taken into account 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.