2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and where the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). Although the Defendant is deemed to have a history of having been subject to criminal punishment several times for the same kind of crime, the Defendant recognized the instant crime in the course of investigation, against his/her mistake, and seems to have committed the instant crime in a state of drinking, the fact that the Defendant appears to have committed the instant crime in a state of drinking, the fact that he/she did not proceed to the direct exercise of force against the victim, the fairness of sentencing and sentencing, there is no special change of circumstances that may be newly considered after the sentence of the lower court, and all of the sentencing conditions expressed in the pleadings, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, method and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime.

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.