The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is unreasonable because the court below's punishment for the accused case (the imprisonment of five years and six months and the confiscation) is too unhued.

2. In full view of the factors and guidelines for sentencing expressed in the judgment of the court below, it cannot be evaluated that the judgment of the court below, which mainly takes the following factors as the main sentencing factors, including the method and content of the crime of this case, the nature of the crime, the degree of victim E’s injury and physical suffering, the victim E’s non-agreement with the victim E, the agreement with the victim of larceny, the defendant’s reflectivity, and criminal records, exceeded the reasonable limit of the court below’s discretion. The prosecutor’s allegation of the unfair sentencing by the prosecutor is without merit, since there were no circumstances or materials to deem that the maintenance of the court’s sentencing is improper in the course of the trial of the above sentencing

On the other hand, if the prosecutor filed an appeal against the accused case, it is deemed that an appeal has been filed against the attachment order case pursuant to Article 9 (8) of the Act on Probation and Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders. However, the court below's decision that ordered the attachment of an electronic tracking device for ten years by imposing the duty to comply with the statement of grounds for appeal or petition of appeal without stating the grounds for appeal or the grounds for appeal, is appropriate, and there is no ground for ex officio reversal.

3. Accordingly, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

(Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, Article 35 of the Act on Probation and Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders