2. The lower court, based on favorable circumstances, sentenced the above sentence by taking into account the following factors: (a) the Defendant committed the instant crime even during the period of suspension of the execution of the instant crime; (b) the Defendant’s confession; (c) the Defendant has no record of being punished for violent crimes; and (d) the Defendant should support the mother with the third degree visual disability.

In full view of the circumstances taken into account by the lower court and all other conditions of sentencing, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, background and consequence of the commission of the offense, means and consequence, size of the offense, and circumstances after the commission of the offense, the sentence imposed by the lower court is deemed reasonable, and the lower court’s judgment exceeded the reasonable bounds of discretion.

There is no circumstance in which the assessment or maintenance is deemed unfair (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). Therefore, as asserted by a prosecutor, the lower court’s sentencing is too uncomfortable and unreasonable.

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