The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the sentence to be suspended (the fine of KRW 3 million) declared by the lower court is too uneasy and unreasonable.

2. It is recognized that the nature of each of the crimes of this case is not less complicated in light of the form and method of each of the crimes of this case.

However, in light of the following: (a) the Defendant committed a first offense in depth; (b) the Defendant appears to have committed each of the crimes in this case by contingency; (c) the victim did not want to be punished by the Defendant in agreement with the victim of assault; (d) the police officer belonging to the G police box who committed a disturbing act wanting to have the Defendant’s wife; and (e) the Defendant’s age, sex and behavior, environment, motive, means and consequence of each of the crimes in this case; and (e) all of the sentencing conditions specified in the argument in this case, such as the circumstances after the commission of the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too uneasible and unreasonable

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition (Article 70 of the Criminal Act). However, since it is apparent that the application of the law in the judgment of the court below was omitted by this mistake after the “Article 70 of the Criminal Act” after the “Article 70 of the Criminal Act” of the detention in the workhouse, it is corrected to add it ex officio pursuant to Article 25(1)