The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year of imprisonment) on the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unfased 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 court 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). However, the relevant provision of the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, which was originally applied to the Defendant, was deleted due to the amendment of the Act. Accordingly, the Defendant was punished as habitual larceny under the Criminal Act more minor criminal law through the amendment of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, and the Defendant was punished as habitual larceny under the same Act, taking full account of the following circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s sentencing is deemed appropriate, and it does not seem to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is without merit.

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