The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. In view of the fact that the Defendant committed the instant crime only one month after the Defendant was released from the prison, and that the Defendant actively damaged the electronic device, such as having an electronic device installed on the floor or wall, etc., the lower court’s punishment (5 million won of fine) is too uneasible and unfair.

2. In light of the unfavorable circumstances pointed out by the public prosecutor, it is necessary to issue a warning to prevent recidivism to the accused. However, it is hard to say that the Defendant’s act of impairing the utility of the electronic device would not reconcept the device for the first time, and that the Defendant would not commit such a crime again. As a result of the first sentencing review, considering the fact that the Defendant was hospitalized in the closed ward from December 2, 2013 to October 2014, which was the first day after the crime, and led to the mental treatment, the risk of recidivism would not be likely to cause any concern. In addition, considering the motive and circumstance leading up to the crime of this case, the Defendant’s age, character, conduct, environment, etc., the punishment imposed by the court below cannot be deemed to be negligible.

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.