2. In light of the fact that the Defendant’s judgment on the grounds of appeal abused the court’s trial procedure and committed the instant crime, and that the Defendant was rendered a judgment dismissing the appeal by filing an appeal even after having lost the first instance court, it is unreasonable to punish the Defendant with strict punishment in light of the nature of the crime and the circumstances.

However, in full view of the following factors: (a) the Defendant recognized the instant crime, and has a depth, and there is no history of punishment heavier than a fine, or there is no history of punishment for the same crime; (b) the Defendant committed the instant crime in the attempted attempt; (c) the Defendant does not want the Defendant’s punishment; (d) the Defendant’s life, character and behavior, environment, criminal record relation; (e) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, criminal record relation; and (e) other factors of sentencing as indicated in the records of the instant case, including the circumstances leading the Defendant to the instant crime, means and consequence; and (e) the Prosecutor’s assertion of unfair sentencing is deemed unreasonable because the Defendant’s punishment is too excessive, and thus, is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.