2. The instant crime was committed by the Defendant at the time prior to the 18th presidential election day, thereby damaging or removing a banner for publicity of a specific candidate set up in the vicinity of the subway station on two occasions, and the criminal liability of the Defendant in light of the specific details, methods, etc. of the instant crime is not weak.

However, in full view of all of the sentencing conditions in the instant case, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and means of crime, and consequence, etc., including the fact that the Defendant suffers from disease, such as stimulative disorder, alcohol dependence, and discharge from hospital around December 4, 2012 immediately before the crime, the Defendant recognized the Defendant as committing the crime, and so far, it is difficult to view that the lower court’s punishment against the Defendant is unreasonable as it is too unreasonable compared to the degree of responsibility.

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 as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.