2. The appellate court’s judgment is reasonable to respect the sentencing condition in comparison with the first instance court where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing, and the sentencing of the first instance court is not beyond the reasonable scope of discretion.

The sentencing of the lower court appears to have determined the sentence in full consideration of the various favorable circumstances to the Defendant, and there is no special circumstance to change the sentencing after the lower judgment.

In addition, examining the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, circumstances after the crime, circumstances after the crime, and the record of the crime in this case, it is not deemed that the sentence of the court below against the defendant is too unreasonable.

3. The prosecutor's appeal of conclusion is without merit, and it is dismissed pursuant to Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.

(However, since it is evident that the term "one hundred months of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution" of the 4th page of the judgment of the court below is a clerical error in the "ten months of imprisonment", it shall be corrected ex officio in accordance with Article 25 of the Rules on Criminal Procedure.