The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that it is improper for the lower court’s punishment (ten months of imprisonment without prison labor, two years of suspended execution, and forty hours of order to attend a course) to be too unhued.

2. In light of the fact that the sentencing is based on the statutory penalty, taking into account the factors constituting the conditions for sentencing prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act within a reasonable and appropriate scope, and the fact that the sentencing is made after the appellate court’s ex post facto review nature, etc., it is reasonable to respect the first instance judgment in a case where there is no change in the conditions for sentencing compared to the first instance judgment, and the first instance judgment does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion. Although the first instance judgment is within the reasonable scope of discretion, it is desirable to reverse the first instance judgment on the sole ground that the sentence differs from the appellate court’s opinion, and to refrain from imposing a sentence that does not differ from the first instance judgment (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In addition, considering that the Defendant did not submit new materials that are disadvantageous to the Defendant in the first instance trial compared to the victim’s bereaved family members, the lower court’s reasonable scope of sentencing was in excess of the scope of discretion in the first instance judgment.

It does not seem that it does not appear.

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.