The sentencing of the court below (two months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, probation, and confiscation) is too unfluent and unfair.

Judgment

In this case, the defendant threatened the victims who have been driving in the way due to the mental fission, and the nature of the crime does not seem to be weak, but it does not cause any serious damage. The defendant suffers from mental fission for more than 10 years, resulting in his personal risk to the other person's mind that he knows about his own mental disorder due to the mental disorder that he suffered from the mental fission for more than 10 years, and the crime of this case is committed, but it is necessary to prevent recidivism after being subject to drug treatment; the court below selected the defendant's imprisonment and ordered probation; the defendant has no specific penalty power except before the fine is imposed and once a punishment is imposed; the defendant has no other penalty power; the defendant's age, character, character, environment, and circumstances after the crime, etc.; thus, the prosecutor's assertion is without merit. Therefore, it is not reasonable to deem that the sentencing of the court below is too unreasonable.

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.

(However, according to Article 25 (1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, the first head of the judgment of the court below is to add "the defendant has committed the following crimes under the condition that the defendant has a weak ability to discern things or make decisions due to Compilation mental fission," and ex officio correction is made.