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, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). New circumstances or special changes in circumstances that may be reflected in sentencing after the sentence of the lower judgment do not appear.

This case is due to the damage of the patrolr, which is a public object, and the nature of the crime is bad, and the defendant has a number of criminal records of multiple violence, etc. are disadvantageous to the defendant.

However, the damage amount of this case is about 1.30,00 won, and the damage amount is not relatively large, and the defendant is against the defendant, etc. are favorable to the defendant.

In addition, considering the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relations, etc. as well as various conditions of sentencing indicated in the pleadings and records, the lower court’s sentence cannot be deemed as being excessively unjustifiable.

3. The prosecutor's appeal of 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.