2. The crime of this case is found to be disadvantageous to the defendant, such as that the defendant driven a car without a driver's license, that in light of the substance of the crime, the criminal liability is heavy, and that the defendant has been punished several times for the same kind of crime.

However, it is reasonable to respect the determination of sentencing in our criminal litigation law, which takes the principle of court-oriented trials and the principle of direct supervision, where there exists no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the sentencing in the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). An unfavorable circumstance against a recognized defendant does not constitute a special change in circumstances that could change the sentence of the court below after the sentence of the court below was sentenced, and it does not seem to be unfair because the sentence against the defendant is too unscheduled, considering the overall circumstances that form the conditions of sentencing as shown in the argument of this case, such as the defendant's age, sexual behavior, environment, etc.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition.