2. The following circumstances are acknowledged: (a) the Defendant committed each of the instant crimes because the Defendant was not even three months after having completed the execution of imprisonment with prison labor for violent crimes; (b) the Defendant’s obscene and obscene crime committed by the Defendant that led to the Defendant’s performance and obscenity; (c) the victim N appears to have received a considerable number of mental impulses in addition to the injury; and (d) there is no other damage that has been recovered.

However, each of the crimes in this case committed by the Defendant was committed under the state of division of a mental disease. Considering the circumstance that the Defendant seems to need a professional mental diagnosis and treatment, and other factors of sentencing prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, etc., the sentence of the lower court cannot be deemed to be too uneasible and unfair.

Therefore, the prosecutor's improper argument of sentencing is without merit.

3. The appeal by the prosecutor of the conclusion is without merit and is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.