2. In a case 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 discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). The circumstances alleged by a prosecutor in the trial at the trial are deemed to have already been considered as the grounds for sentencing of the judgment of the first instance. As to latter concurrent crimes under Article 37 of the Criminal Act, equity should be considered when the judgment is rendered simultaneously with the crime for which the judgment became final and conclusive, and there is no change in sentencing conditions compared with the judgment of the lower court because new sentencing data have not been submitted in the trial. Considering the circumstances and result of the instant crime, the circumstances after the crime was committed, the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, and environment, etc., as well as various sentencing conditions as shown in the records and arguments of the instant case, the sentencing of the court of the first instance cannot be deemed to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. Since the appeal by the public prosecutor is without merit, it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.