2. In full view of all other circumstances, including the following: (a) the Defendant damaged the victim’s motor vehicle and subsequently resisting the above crime; (b) the Defendant did not have filed an appeal against the judgment of conviction; (c) the Defendant recognized his mistake on the judgment of conviction; (d) the Defendant was a primary offender; (e) the degree of damage caused by the instant crime was not limited; (e) the Defendant paid KRW 1 million to the victim at the time of the trial; and (e) the Defendant agreed with the victim by paying KRW 1 million; and (e) the Defendant’s character and conduct, environment, relationship with the victim, motive and means of the instant crime; and (e) the motive and consequence of the instant crime; and (e) the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court is deemed adequate.

Therefore, the prosecutor's assertion of unfair sentencing 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.

[However, since the 5m "fivem" of the facts constituting the crime of the court below seems to be obvious that it is a clerical error in writing, it shall be corrected ex officio in accordance with Article 25 (1) of the Regulations on Criminal Procedure.]