2. On April 13, 2017, the lower court sentenced the above sentence in consideration of the following favorable circumstances: (a) the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years on the 21st of the same month, which was sentenced to imprisonment for a violation of the Road Traffic Act on April 13, 2017, and the judgment became final and conclusive on the 21st of the same month; (b) committed a second offense during the period of suspension of execution; (c) took into account the fact that the Defendant did not have the same electric power; (d) recognized the Defendant’s crime; and (e) deposited KRW 2 million

Even in light of the circumstances that are disadvantageous to the Defendant’s nature of the offense, comprehensively taking into account the favorable circumstances, such as the fact that the victimized police officer appears to have received the Defendant’s deposit money, and all other conditions of sentencing, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, background leading to the offense, means and consequence, scale of the offense, and circumstances after the offense, it cannot be deemed that the lower court’s judgment exceeding the reasonable bounds of discretion, or maintaining it as is, is unreasonable.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Therefore, prosecutor’s assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal 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.