The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal (the imprisonment of eight months, the suspension of execution of two years, and the community service work 120 hours) is too unfasible and unfair.

2. The Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the principle of court-oriented trials and the principle of direct determination, requires respect for the determination of sentencing in cases where there exists no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). There is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the lower court’s failure to submit new data on sentencing in the trial. There is no change in the degree of damage caused by the instant crime, such as debrising the victim for treatment of about 58 days, and the Defendant did not agree with the victim. However, even though the Defendant was unable to reach an agreement on the degree of damage caused by the instant crime, considering the circumstances revealed in the instant records and pleadings, such as that the sentencing of the lower court was too unfilled and the Defendant deposited a total of KRW 15.8 million in order to recover damage, it is not recognized that the Defendant exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

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.