2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to 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). Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, the sentencing materials against the Defendant were not newly submitted in the first instance trial, while, on the contrary, at the same time, new sentencing materials favorable to the Defendant were additionally submitted in the first instance trial, such as submission of a written agreement with the victim by the Defendant.

Therefore, the sentencing revealed in the oral argument of the instant case is too uneasible because the sentencing, which was exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, is unreasonable.

The prosecutor's improper argument in sentencing is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition.