2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the judgment of the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance 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). As new sentencing data are not submitted at the trial court, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the judgment of the lower court, and the circumstances for which the prosecutor claims for the reason of sentencing are unfair, are deemed to have already been reflected in the sentencing grounds of the lower court; the Defendant is the primary offender; the Defendant is deemed to have committed the instant crime; the Defendant seems to have committed the instant crime by drinking; the degree of assault is relatively excessive; and the motive, means and result of the instant crime; and the circumstances after the crime, etc., of the lower court’s sentencing cannot be deemed to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

3. 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.