2. The determination of this case is that the defendants concealed a criminal who committed a sex offense against his/her grandchildren, and the above crime interfered with the investigation by an investigative agency and interfered with the legitimate criminal justice procedure, and the punishment for such crime is not less complicated.

However, the defendants recognized the crime of this case and reflects on the fact that the defendants were found to have committed the crime of this case, and the defendants were accommodated in the restaurant operated by the defendants at class 3 of intellectual disability 3, and the defendants concealed the crime by leading the defendants to the recognition. The defendants A did not have any criminal records exceeding the suspension of the execution of imprisonment, and the defendants B did not have any criminal records exceeding the suspension of the execution of imprisonment. In full view of all the sentencing conditions of the arguments of this case, including the defendants' economic circumstances, age, character and behavior, environment, circumstances after the crime, and whether there was a change in circumstances after the sentence of the court below was sentenced, the court below's punishment seems to be within a reasonable and appropriate scope, and it cannot be deemed that excessive unreasonable

Therefore, 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 ground that it is without merit.