2. The judgment of the Defendant committed each of the crimes of this case during the period of repeated crime, the Defendant’s crime of this case constitutes an element of sentencing unfavorable to the Defendant, such as the following: (a) the Defendant harmed the peace of residence at night; and (b) the Defendant was unable to repay or agree on the amount of damage to the victim C and E; and (c) the Defendant did not have any previous record of punishment for violent crime, but has many records of punishment

However, in full view of the following factors: (a) the Defendant recognized the instant crime; (b) the Defendant did not have any history of punishment for the same kind of crime; (c) the amount of damage is minor; and (d) the Defendant did not escape from the victim C with the horses of the said victim after committing each crime against the victim C in the judgment below; (b) the Defendant paid and agreed on the amount of damage to the victim KTinger at the court below; (c) the Defendant suffered from the victim of cirrology, urology, urology, and climatic disorder; and (d) the Defendant suffered from the victim of climatic disorder; and (e) the sentencing factors favorable to the Defendant and other various sentencing conditions indicated in the records of the instant case, the sentence against the Defendant is appropriate.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.