The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (two years of imprisonment with prison labor for a period of eight months, two years of probation, and three years of probation) declared by the court below is deemed to be too unfun

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared with the lower court’s failure to submit new sentencing data at the trial and the lower court. In full view of the factors revealed in the instant argument, the lower court’s sentencing is too unfluent and so it does not seem that the lower court exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, as it is too unfluent.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

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

However, among the judgment of the court below, “the heavier punishment” of the aggravated concurrent crimes is a clerical error of “the heavier punishment”, and the application of the relevant Article of the Criminal Procedure Act is obvious that “the choice of the punishment and the choice of the punishment has been omitted by mistake,” and “the choice of the punishment following the 4th sentence Article 329 of the Criminal Procedure Act,” under Article 25(1) of the Regulations on Criminal Procedure, the ex officio correction is made.

.