2. The judgment of the defendant is subject to the suspension of the execution of imprisonment and fines several times for the same crime, and in particular, the crime of this case is likely to be committed during the suspension period of the execution of larceny.

Such circumstances are disadvantageous to the defendant.

However, the defendant recognizes the crime and repents the wrongness in depth.

The degree of damage is relatively important, and most of the damage was recovered by the victim's agreement or stolen goods returned to the victim.

The defendant suffers from stimulative disorder, depression disorder, shock control disorder, etc., and it seems that these health conditions have caused the crime.

Such circumstances are favorable to the defendant.

The lower court seems to have sentenced to a fine of KRW 5 million by taking into account all the circumstances favorable to the Defendant, as seen above, after conducting an investigation into sentencing by the court investigator.

In full view of the matters on the conditions of sentencing and the applicable sentences in the trial, the sentencing judgment of the court below exceeded the reasonable bounds of its discretion.

It is difficult to view that it is remarkably unfair to maintain the judgment of the court below as it is or the judgment of the court below.

In addition, considering the defendant's age, career, sex, environment, family relation, health status, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence, etc., the sentence of the court below is too unfeasible and unfair.

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.