2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and where the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). As new sentencing materials have not been submitted at the trial, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the lower court’s judgment, and circumstances in which the prosecutor claims for the reason of sentencing are being unfair, are deemed to have already been reflected in the reasons for sentencing of the lower court; the Defendant is recognized as having committed a crime and wrong; the Defendant has no history of criminal punishment; the Defendant has no history of punishment; and other various circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, sex behavior, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime; and the circumstances after the crime, etc., which are the conditions of sentencing as shown in the argument and the record of the instant case, the lower court’s sentencing shall not be deemed to be unfair by exceeding the reasonable scope of discretion.

The prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

3. Accordingly, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.