2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with 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 it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In light of the following, the Defendant’s unfavorable circumstances asserted by the prosecutor are considered as the primary sentencing factors for the judgment of the first instance court, and the victim has repeatedly sought the Defendant’s wife.

Furthermore, considering that there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the original judgment as the new sentencing data was not submitted at the trial court, and the circumstances and results of the instant crime, the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, and environment, etc., as well as the various conditions of sentencing as shown in the records and arguments in the instant case, it cannot be deemed that the sentencing of the first instance court exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion because it is too unfeasible.

3. Since the appeal by the public prosecutor is without merit, it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.