2. The crime of this case is not likely to be committed because the defendant has parked a part of the other person's inland part in the place where the defendant parked a part of Oral part, and thus, it is difficult to understand that the defendant's use of the part of the other person's inland part in order to pay approximately KRW 2,50,000, the repair cost of approximately KRW 2,500,000 is damaged to the extent of damage.

The defendant has a record of being punished once the suspension of the execution of imprisonment with labor and seven times of a fine, and the three times of a fine is a crime related to violence.

However, considering the fact that the defendant led to the confession and reflect of the crime of this case, and that the injured person does not want punishment against the defendant by mutual agreement with the victim, the court below’s punishment cannot be deemed to be unfair as it is too unfortunate, in full view of various sentencing conditions as shown in the argument of this case, including the defendant’s age, sexual behavior, environment, the background and result of the crime of this case, and the circumstances after the crime.

3. In conclusion, 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.