All appeals filed by the prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the lower court’s punishment (for the Defendants, six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, observation of protection, and community service order 200 hours) is too uneasy and unreasonable.

2. It is desirable to refrain from rendering a sentence that does not change the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, if the first instance court did not change the conditions of sentencing, and if the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect them. Although the sentence of the first instance falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to refrain from rendering a sentence that does not differ from the first instance court on the sole ground of the difference between the view of the appellate court and the judgment of the first instance court (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In accordance with the foregoing legal doctrine, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the lower court on the grounds that new sentencing materials have not been submitted in the trial, and in full view of all the reasons for sentencing as stated by the lower court and the reasons for sentencing as stated in the instant records and arguments, it is not recognized that the sentencing of the lower court is too unfilled and exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. In conclusion, the Prosecutor’s appeal against the Defendants is without merit. Thus, all of the appeals are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.