The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the court below (two years of suspended sentence in the month of imprisonment with prison labor) is too unhued and unfair.

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). The lower court determined the sentence against the Defendant by comprehensively taking into account the circumstances favorable to the Defendant and the unfavorable circumstances.

The circumstances alleged by the prosecutor on the grounds of appeal are already considered in the sentencing process of the court below, and there is no new change in circumstances that could change the sentence of the court below in the trial.

In light of the fact that the Defendant’s degree of participation in the instant crime was limited to driving an accomplice E and F, and the degree of participation in the instant crime was not significant, the Defendant’s sentencing conditions, such as the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the commission of the crime, and the scope of recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines, such as the circumstances after the commission of the crime, cannot be deemed to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, or to be unfair because it was too uneasible.

3. According to the conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition.