The sentence of the court below (six months of imprisonment) is too unhued and unreasonable.

Judgment

The fact that the defendant has already been punished for imprisonment not less than three times for the same crime, the fact that no damage has yet been recovered, and the fact that the defendant is judged to have no reflectiveness since the first trial date of the court below, which is not known for a long time after the first trial of the court below.

However, considering the fact that the amount of theft of a defendant is not very large, that the health of a defendant is insufficient, and that the defendant seems to have committed the crime of this case due to economic difficulties, etc., it is favorable to sentencing factors. In addition, considering the following factors: (a) various sentencing data on the arguments, such as the background of the crime of this case, circumstances after the crime, the age of the defendant, character and conduct, environment, etc.; and (b) the scope of recommended sentences according to the sentencing guidelines of the Sentencing Commission [the scope of punishment of larceny No. 2 (general larceny: imprisonment for general property: 4 months to 10 months], etc., the prosecutor’s assertion is without merit

Therefore, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.