Judgment

It is reasonable to respect the sentencing of the first instance court in cases where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of the discretion. Although the sentence of the first instance court falls within the reasonable scope of the discretion, it is desirable to refrain from rendering a sentence that differs from the first instance court solely on the ground that the opinion of the appellate court is somewhat different from that of the appellate court (Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In light of the foregoing legal principles, considering that new sentencing data was not submitted in the health zone, the lower court did not change the conditions of sentencing, and there is no change in the conditions of sentencing, and there is no history of criminal punishment heavier than the previous trial and the fine, it cannot be deemed that the sentence that the lower court imposed is too unfair to avoid the reasonable scope of the discretion, considering the favorable circumstances, such as the fact that there is no change in the conditions of sentencing in the first instance court and the

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 groundless.