2. The Korean Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the principle of directness, has a unique area for sentencing determination, and there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the first instance court’s sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In this case, there is no particular change in the sentencing conditions compared to the original judgment.

In addition, in full view of all the conditions of the pleadings and the records of the instant crime, including the details and contents of the instant crime, the minor damage, the original agreement was reached, drinking volume, the criminal records of the Defendant’s like crime (one time, a fine of one million won), the circumstances after the instant crime, and the age, character and conduct, occupation, family relationship, economic form, health condition, etc., it is not recognized that the sentencing of the lower court, which sentenced the Defendant to a suspended sentence of two years (including community service work for 120 hours) for one year, exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. Accordingly, the prosecutor's appeal cannot be accepted, and it is dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.