2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and where the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court, comprehensively taking account of the circumstances in the judgment, determined the sentence against the Defendant.

The circumstances alleged by the prosecutor on the grounds of appeal (criminal records, the scale of damage, and the degree of recovery from damage) are shown to have already been considered in the sentencing process of the court below, and there is no new change in circumstances that could change the sentence of the court below in the trial.

When comprehensively considering the conditions of sentencing, such as the defendant's age, living environment, motive for the crime, and circumstances after the crime, as shown in the deliberation of the court below and the court below, it cannot be deemed that the sentence imposed by the court below exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion or is too uneasible and unfair.

3. According to the conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition.