2. The reasoning of the judgment reveals that the Defendant had been punished for the same crime several times, each of the crimes of this case committed repeatedly during the period of suspension of execution due to the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties, and that the Defendant used violence or injury to the aged victim D and E, and that the Defendant appears to have suffered considerable physical and mental damage due to the Defendant’s crime, such as threatening the victim F, by using the brick, which is a dangerous object, and threatening the victim F, is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

However, in full view of the fact that the defendant has not yet been sentenced to imprisonment, the fact that the defendant still has no record of being sentenced to imprisonment, the fact that the defendant recognized the crime of this case, some of the money for the victims in the original trial, the fact that the family members of the defendant want to have the prior address of the defendant, and other various sentencing conditions as shown in the argument of this case, such as the defendant's age, character and behavior and environment, it is difficult to view that the sentence imposed by the court below

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.