2. The fact that there is no agreement with the victim on the judgment, that the defendant has been sentenced several times to imprisonment, suspended execution, and sentenced to a fine for the same crime is disadvantageous to the defendant.

However, the amount of damage to the theft of this case is somewhat minor, and some damage is returned to the victim, and the defendant intentionally committed each of the crimes of this case with negligence.

The fact that there is room to see, and that the defendant is making it difficult to maintain his livelihood by selling high water by selling it, is favorable to the defendant.

In full view of such circumstances and the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the commission of the crime, and all of the sentencing conditions indicated in the instant case, the lower court’s punishment cannot be deemed unfair as it is too uneasible and unreasonable.

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.