2. However, the Defendant committed a crime of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. of this case (a group, deadly weapon, etc.) without being aware of even during the period of the same repeated crime; the Defendant also committed several times violence-related crimes against the Defendant; the Defendant’s bereaved family members or victims of the victim D; the Defendant did not agree with H; and the Defendant was subject to a disposition of forfeiture due to a violation of discipline during a prison life, which is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

On the other hand, the defendant recognized his mistake and reflects it, committed a crime in violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. (a collective, deadly weapon, etc.) in contingent, committed a crime in violation of the Act on the Punishment of Violences, etc. of this case, and committed a crime in violation of 2.50,00 won. Among them, the degree of 2.30,00 won was returned to the victim (the trial record 26,000 won). Although there was a criminal record as seen earlier, there was no record related to the larceny. However, there was no record related to the thief among them. The misunderstanding that the death of the victim D was caused by the crime in violation of the Punishment of Violence, etc. Act (a collective, deadly weapon, etc.) committed by the victim himself. It seems that there was a cause for the crime in violation of the Act on the Punishment of Violence, etc. of at night Buildings, theft, and the circumstance and contents of the crime in this case, Defendant's age, personality and behavior, environment, and occupation.

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