The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) by the court below is unreasonable as it is too unfasible to the extent that the punishment (3 million won in penalty) imposed by the court below is too unfased.

2. In a case where there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared to the judgment of 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). Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, the lower court, based on the foregoing, determined the sentence by taking into account the various circumstances as indicated in its reasoning.

In full view of the following facts: (a) no new circumstance exists to change the sentence of the original court in the trial after the judgment of the original court; (b) the Defendant did not repeat the offense; and (c) the Defendant has consistently been consulted with the trial; and (d) all of the sentencing conditions indicated in the argument of the instant case, such as the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive and means of the offense; and (b) the sentencing of the original court exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion as it is too unhued.

It does not appear.

The prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

3. The appeal by the prosecutor of the conclusion 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.