2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the lower court’s judgment, and where the sentencing of the lower court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court determined the sentence against the Defendant by comprehensively taking account of the circumstances favorable to the Defendant and unfavorable conditions

The circumstances alleged by the prosecutor on the grounds of appeal (such as the necessity of strict punishment, the inferior nature of the crime, and the damage not yet recovered) seems to have already been considered in the sentencing process of the court below.

In addition, there is no new change in circumstances that can change the sentence of the court below in the first instance court.

In full view of the sentencing conditions, including the character and conduct of a defendant, environment, motive, means and consequence of a crime, circumstances after a crime, etc., as shown in the deliberation of the original court and the party concerned, including the fact that the defendant has been suspended from indictment for the same crime, that there was no criminal conviction before the crime in this case was committed, and that there was no economic condition, etc., the defendant cannot be deemed to be unfair as it goes beyond the reasonable scope of discretion.

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 prosecutor's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.