2. The crime of this case by finding out that the Defendant did not correct the body of the vehicle owned by the victim, open water and intrude into the body, thereby leaving the front right, and then attempted to commit the crime of this case. The crime of this case is disadvantageous to the Defendant, such as: (a) there is no good character of the crime; (b) there is a record of punishment several times due to the same kind of crime (i) and (c) there is a record of punishment several times due to the same crime (i) and (iv) the crime of this case is committed without being aware of it during the repeated crime period

However, in full view of the fact that the defendant recognized the crime of this case, the thief was committed against the defendant, the victim did not want the punishment of the defendant, the victim suffered from the disorder of sustainability, the result of the application of the sentencing guidelines by the Sentencing Committee (the scope of recommending punishment: between August and June, the period of imprisonment, between January and June, and the result of the application of the sentencing guidelines by the Sentencing Committee (the consideration of the same repeated crime (aggravated cause), the unguilty of punishment) and all other sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments of this case, including the defendant's age, character and behavior, character and character, intelligence and environment, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., it cannot be deemed that the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable.

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