2. In light of the fact that each of the crimes of this case in question was committed by the Defendant, who was the victim of the past year, threatened him/her to recover his/her children, and furthermore, insulting the victim by attaching a leaflet that may cause a sense of sexual shame by gathering his/her real name on the bulletin board of the apartment where the victim resides, and the nature of the crime is bad in light of the content, degree, method, etc. of the crime, and the Defendant did not agree with the victim, it is necessary to punish the Defendant

However, in full view of the fact that the Defendant recognized each of the crimes in this case and against his mistake, the Defendant did not have the same criminal records, and other factors of sentencing as shown in the records and arguments, such as the Defendant’s age, family environment, and circumstances before and after the crime, it cannot be deemed that the lower court’s sentence against the Defendant is too uneasible and unreasonable.

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