2. The Defendant committed each of the instant crimes in only two years since he/she was sentenced to six times as a larceny crime (one suspended sentence and five suspended sentence), and the Defendant was released from prison by six months after having been sentenced to six months of imprisonment for the crime of bodily injury. The instant crime was committed by the Defendant, even though he/she did not have a license after he/she stolen the victims’ property and transported it by a vehicle, etc., and was committed three times more than 10 days by driving the vehicle, etc., and did not completely recover from the scene.

However, in full view of the following circumstances: (a) the fact that the Defendant recognized all crimes; (b) the amount of damage was not so large; (c) the Defendant was caused by the instant crime for his livelihood; (d) there was a family member to support the Defendant; (e) the Defendant’s health status was not good; and (e) other various circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, environment, sex, criminal conduct, circumstances before and after the instant crime; and (e) the conditions for sentencing specified in the records and pleadings, the sentence imposed by the lower court is too uneasible and unreasonable.

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.