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 such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court determined the sentence against the Defendant by comprehensively taking into account the circumstances favorable to the Defendant and the unfavorable circumstances.

The circumstances alleged by the prosecutor on the grounds of appeal are already considered in the sentencing process of the court below, and there is no new change in circumstances that could change the sentence of the court below in the trial.

When comprehensively considering the conditions of sentencing, such as the character, conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc. as shown in the deliberation of the court below and the party concerned, and the scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines, the sentence of the court below cannot be deemed to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion or to be unfair because it is too unfeasible.

3. According to the conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition.