2. The instant crime was committed in a systematic, planned, and intelligent manner under which the method of crime was committed, and the nature of the crime is not good, and the damage therefrom is extensive, and the Defendant played an essential role in the instant crime as delivery and surveillance measures is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

However, considering the following: (a) the Defendant’s mistake and reflects; (b) the Defendant has no record of criminal punishment in the Republic of Korea; (c) the act of theft was committed in an attempted crime and there is no direct monetary damage due to the instant crime; and (d) the motive and background leading up to the instant crime; (b) the details of the relevant crime; (c) the circumstances after the commission of the instant crime; (d) the Defendant’s age; and (e) the circumstances of various sentencing indicated in the record, such as the Defendant’s sexual conduct, etc., the sentence of the lower court is so

The above argument is without merit.

3. Accordingly, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is groundless.