The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal (two years of suspended sentence in six months of imprisonment) is too unfluent and unfair.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and where the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015, etc.). It is necessary to punish the Defendant with heavy punishment in that the instant crime continues even while the Defendant was subject to multiple juvenile protective disposition due to the same crime and is subject to a fine by a summary order. However, it is necessary to take into account favorable circumstances, such as: (a) recognizing and reflecting the Defendant’s mistake; (b) the Defendant is in a situation in which he/she must support his/her wife and child at his/her age; and (c) restoring damage equivalent to approximately KRW 300,00 to three victims at the first instance court.

In addition, the circumstances alleged by the prosecutor on the grounds of appeal are deemed to have already been considered in the sentencing process of the court below, and there is no new change in circumstances that could change the sentence of the court below in the trial.

When comprehensively considering the conditions of sentencing, such as the character and conduct, environment, motive of crime, degree of damage, etc. of the defendant as shown in the deliberation of the court below and the court below, and the scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines, the sentence of the court below cannot be deemed to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, or to be unfair because it is too low.

3. According to the conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition.