The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unlawful in sentencing) of the lower court’s punishment (one year of imprisonment with prison labor, one year of suspended execution, and 120 hours of community service order) is too uneasy and unreasonable.

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 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). The fact that the suffering suffered from the instant crime appears to be considerable, and the fact that the victim did not have any suspicion from the damage is disadvantageous.

On the other hand, however, the fact that the crime is recognized and is closely against the law, and that there is no record of criminal punishment is more favorable.

The lower court did not change the conditions of sentencing compared with the lower court on the ground that the sentence was determined in consideration of the above circumstances, and the new sentencing materials have not been submitted in the trial.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the various circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the commission of the crime, the circumstances after the commission of the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is deemed to be excessively light of the lower court’s reasonable scope of discretion.

subsection (b) of this section.

We do not accept the prosecutor's improper argument of sentencing.

3. The appeal by the prosecutor of the conclusion is without merit and is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.