2. The lower court rendered a sentence by taking account of various sentencing conditions as shown in the records and arguments of the instant case, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive and means of the instant crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., under favorable circumstances that are considered to be an excessive punishment compared to the instant Defendant’s act that destroyed the property equivalent to KRW 110,00 in the market price, and that the Defendant re-offending during the period of repeated offense, and that there was the record of punishment for the same kind of crime, and determined a sentence by taking account of the following factors: the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive and means of the instant crime, and the circumstances after the crime.

The reason for the improper sentencing (a poorness of crime, risk of recidivism, etc.) alleged by the prosecutor appears to be that the court below had already considered the punishment for the defendant, and otherwise changed the above sentencing conditions.

There is no circumstance to see the above sentencing conditions, and considering the above sentencing conditions, the sentence of the court below is determined to be reasonable within the reasonable scope of discretion.

The prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

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