2. Determination

A. Considering the favorable circumstances such as the confession of Defendant A’s crime, the primary offender, the degree of insult, the fact that the victim is not serious, and the fact that the victim seems to have made efforts as a consequence of the agreement, the victim’s insult in the place where a large number of employees exist, and the fact that the victim did not reach an agreement with the victim, etc., disadvantageous circumstances such as the Defendant’s age, sex behavior, motive, frequency of the crime, method of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment cannot be deemed unfair as it is too unreasonable in light of all the sentencing conditions.

B. Considering the favorable circumstances such as the confession of Defendant B’s crime, the first offender, the degree of violence, the fact that it is not serious, the fact that it appears to have been endeavored as a consequence of the agreement, the nature of the crime is not easy by assaulting the victim during the dispute, and the fact that it does not reach an agreement with the victim, etc., the court below’s punishment cannot be deemed to be unfair because it is too unreasonable in light of all the sentencing conditions, such as the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, motive, frequency of the crime, method of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc.

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.