2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court 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). Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared with the lower court’s failure to submit new sentencing data at the trial and the lower court. In full view of the factors revealed in the instant argument, the lower court’s sentencing is too unfluent and so it does not seem that the lower court exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, as it is too unfluent.

3. The prosecutor's appeal of conclusion is without merit, and it is dismissed pursuant to Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.

(Ex officio, in accordance with Article 25(1) of the Rules of Criminal Procedure, the deletion of Chapters 17 through 2, 13, and 17 through 18, respectively, shall be corrected.)