The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

The sentencing of the court below is too unfortunate and unfair.

2. Determination

A. In a case where there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared to the lower court with respect to Defendant case, and where the sentencing of the lower court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). Circumstances the Prosecutor asserts as an element of sentencing in this court are the following: (a) the lower court appears to have been suspended during the oral proceedings of the lower court; or (b) the lower court determined the sentence against the Defendant and the requester for the observation order for protection (hereinafter “Defendant”); and (c) no particular change in circumstances is found in the matters subject to sentencing after the sentence of the lower court.

If the court below comprehensively takes into account all the conditions of sentencing as shown in the argument of this case, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, intelligence, environment, family relationship, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc., the court below’s sentencing is too unjustifiable, even in light of the circumstances that the prosecutor is going against on the grounds of appeal, and thus, it cannot be said that the court below’s sentencing was made within the reasonable scope of discretion and is unfair.

This part of the prosecutor's argument is without merit.

B. As to the case of the claim for protection observation order, inasmuch as a prosecutor filed an appeal against the Defendant’s case, it is deemed that an appeal was filed as to the case of the claim for protection observation order pursuant to Articles 21-8 and 9(8) of the Act on the Electronic Monitoring, Etc., however, the prosecutor did not submit legitimate grounds for appeal as to this part, and the judgment of the court below does not find the grounds for reversal ex officio even after examining the judgment below.

3. The appeal by the prosecutor of the conclusion is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act and Article 35 of the Act on the Attachment, etc. of Electronic Devices on the grounds that the appeal by the prosecutor is groundless.