2. In light of the fact that the defendant was sentenced to four times criminal punishment by a fine for a violation of the Act on the Establishment of Local Reserve Forces, and the fact that the crime of violation of the Act on the Establishment of Local Reserve Forces is related to national security, it is necessary to impose strict liability equivalent to that of the defendant;

I see that it is.

However, in full view of the following factors: (a) the Defendant made confession of all the instant crimes while committing the instant crime; (b) there is no record of other crimes except a violation of the Act on the Establishment of Local Reserve Forces; and and (c) other factors such as the Defendant’s age, sex behavior, environment, motive and circumstance of the instant crime; and (b) all the factors of sentencing as shown in the instant pleadings, such as the circumstances after the commission of the instant crime, etc., the sentence imposed by

Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is not accepted.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition (Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure; Article 70 of the former Criminal Act (amended by Act No. 12575, May 14, 2014) provides that “Article 70 of the former Criminal Act (amended by Act No. 12575, May 14, 201)” shall be corrected to “Article 70(1) of the Criminal Act.”