Therefore, the dismissal of the above indictment was determined separately as it is and excluded from this Court's judgment.

2. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the lower court’s punishment (an amount of KRW 3 million) is too uneased and unreasonable.

3. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to 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 such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court is reasonable to give an opportunity to improve character and behavior in society because the Defendant committed the instant crime while having a large number of identical criminal records and repeated crimes during the period of the same offense, and the Defendant took the attitude against the Defendant, while faithfully receiving the treatment of mental illness, and is faithfully given an opportunity to improve

The punishment was determined by taking into account various circumstances, such as the fact that it appears.

Considering the reasons alleged by the prosecutor, the lower court’s sentencing was too unhued and exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

There is no special change in circumstances that can change the sentencing after the judgment of the court below.

In addition, considering all the sentencing conditions indicated in the record, such as the defendant's age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence of the court below cannot be deemed unfair.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

4. 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.