2. In light of the specific contents and methods of the instant crime, the nature of the Defendant’s crime is not somewhat weak.

However, there are the following circumstances that should be favorable or considered to the defendant.

The number of crimes was limited to one time, and the defendant did not enter the telecom, unlike other accomplices, and performed only the role of waiting in the near the Kabter.

Victims do not want punishment.

At the time of committing the crime, the defendant was enrolled in a high school as 18 years of age under the Juvenile Act, and did not reach 20 years of age.

The defendant has recognized a crime and committed a mistake in depth.

Until now, juvenile protective disposition has only been taken once, but there has not been criminal records.

The parents of the defendant are leading the defendant.

In the case of other accomplices, it was decided to forward to the Juvenile Department.

In full view of all the sentencing conditions in the instant case, including the Defendant’s age, occupation, character and conduct, environment, motive, means, and consequence of the crime, including these various circumstances, it is difficult to deem that the sentence of the lower court is too unreasonable compared to the Defendant’s degree of responsibility.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

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.