2. The crime of this case, which is judged, is likely to undermine the sustainable development of fisheries as a result, and requires strict punishment corresponding thereto, and the defendant again commits the crime of this case even though he had the record of punishment two times including the suspension of the execution of imprisonment with prison labor for the same kind of crime, and the nature of such crime is not less than that of the crime.

However, the defendant is showing that he/she lives in custody for a period of not more than two months, and his/her mistake seems to be repented in depth, and again, he/she does not commit such crime.

In addition, there are many females captured by the defendant due to the crime of this case, and the situation in which the females captured are released after the crime of this case is also recognized.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the instant crime, and the circumstances after the commission of the crime, the sentence imposed by the lower court is too uneasible and unreasonable.

3. The appeal by the prosecutor of the conclusion is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.