2. The lower court rendered a sentence by taking account of the following factors: (a) under the unfavorable circumstances under which the nature of the crime of this case is inferior, and the mental suffering of the victim seems to be very high; (b) the Defendant recognized his mistake and reflects his depth; (c) the Defendant is receiving a mental treatment for a considerable period of time due to symptoms such as the pertinent circumstances and the damage network; and (d) the Defendant is a primary offender who has no criminal history; and (c) the Defendant’s age, sex behavior, environment, motive and means of the crime; and (d) other factors of sentencing specified in the instant records and arguments, such as the circumstances after the crime.

The grounds for the improper sentencing (displacement of crime, severe punishment of the victim, etc.) alleged by the prosecutor are shown to have been sufficiently considered in determining the punishment against the defendant by the court below, and the above conditions of the sentencing changed otherwise.

There is no circumstance to see the above sentencing conditions, and considering the above sentencing conditions, the sentence of the court below is determined to be reasonable within the reasonable scope of discretion.

The prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

3. The appeal by the prosecutor of the conclusion is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.