The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal that the court below sentenced the defendant (eight months of imprisonment) is too unhued and unfair.

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). The Defendant does not know even though he/she was a repeated crime period, and instead went to each of the crimes of this case. In particular, in the case of the crime of injury, the Defendant’s injury is an unfavorable circumstance against the Defendant, such as the fact that it is not good for the Defendant to commit a crime that is going to go beyond the victim on the bus platform without any particular reason.

However, in full view of all the conditions of sentencing as shown in the records and arguments, including the fact that the Defendant recognized all the crimes, the amount of each damage caused by larceny and fraud is not so significant, the victims do not want punishment, and considering the favorable circumstances such as the Defendant’s old age, and the circumstances leading to the Defendant’s character, character, environment, and crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable because it goes beyond the reasonable limit of discretion.

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