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). As no new data on sentencing have been submitted at the trial court, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the lower court’s judgment, and the circumstances for which the prosecutor alleged as grounds for sentencing are unfair, are deemed to have already been reflected in the lower court’s sentencing grounds, the fact that the Defendant agreed with the victim of the crime of interference with the business, the fact that the Defendant confessions and objects to the crime, and other circumstances, such as the motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc., the lower court’s sentencing cannot be deemed to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

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.