2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to 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 such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015, etc.). In the course of the Defendant’s exercise of violence and intimidation against a victim who was in a relationship with the victim, the victim appears to have suffered considerable physical or mental pain, but the Defendant did not receive any tolerance from the victim up to the present day.

In addition, the defendant has been punished for several violent crimes, and has been repeatedly committed the crime of this case during the probation period for the same kind of crime.

When comprehensively taking into account the sentencing conditions, such as the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, relationship with the victim, and circumstances after the crime, including the absence of special circumstances or changes in circumstances that may be newly considered in the trial of the party, the sentence imposed by the court below shall be appropriate, and it shall not be deemed unfair because it is too heavy or unreasonable.

3. According to the conclusion, the appeal by the prosecutor and the defendant is without merit, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.