2. Considering that the Defendant had been punished several times for the same crime as the instant case and that the Defendant committed each of the instant crimes again during the period of repeated crime, and that there was no agreement with the victims, strict punishment against the Defendant is necessary.

However, in full view of the fact that the Defendant recognized the instant crime and divided the depth of the instant crime, the Defendant suffering from the existence of early-to-date illness and alcohol, and such disease appears to have caused the instant crime, and that the Defendant is hospitalized in the hospital and being treated for treatment, and that the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive and circumstance of the instant crime, means and consequence of the instant crime, etc., and all the sentencing circumstances indicated in the records and arguments, such as the circumstances after the instant crime, are not recognized as unfair because the sentencing of the lower court is too uneasible.

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. It is so decided as per Disposition.