2. On January 5, 2017, the crime of this case, which was committed by the Defendant, committed a theft of cash at the alcohol house in which the Defendant was an employee and by intrusion on the church building, and thus, the nature of the crime is not weak, and the Defendant committed a larceny even after being investigated by an investigative agency as a result of the larceny crime on January 5, 2017.

In addition, the defendant has already been punished five times for the larceny crime, and the execution of the final sentence has been completed, and the defendant committed the crime of this case without being aware of it even during the repeated crime period.

However, in light of the fact that the Defendant recognized the instant crime and divided his mistake, the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, relationship with the victim, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc., as well as various other circumstances, which are the conditions of sentencing as shown in the record, such as the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence of the lower court is too unfeasible and unreasonable.

3. According to the conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition.