The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

The summary of the grounds for appeal: The punishment sentenced by the court below to the defendant (two years of imprisonment and three years of suspended execution) is too uneasy and unfair.

Judgment

Based on the statutory penalty, the sentencing is a discretionary judgment that takes into account the conditions of the sentencing prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act within a reasonable and appropriate scope.

However, considering the unique area of sentencing of sentencing of the first instance that is respected under the principle of trial priority and the principle of direct jurisdiction taken by our criminal litigation law and the nature of the ex post facto review of the appellate court, the sentencing of sentencing of the first instance was exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion when comprehensively taking into account the factors and guidelines for sentencing specified in the first instance sentencing trial process.

In light of the records newly discovered in the course of the appellate court’s sentencing hearing, it is reasonable to file an unfair judgment of the first instance court, only in cases where it is deemed unfair to maintain the sentencing of the first instance court as it is for the court to judge the sentencing of the first instance court.

In the absence of such exceptional circumstances, it is desirable to respect the sentencing of the first instance trial (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). Examining the record in light of the aforementioned legal principles, the reason for the illegality of sentencing asserted by the prosecutor is that the lower court appears to have been sufficiently considered in determining the sentence against the Defendant, and that the lower court appears to have clearly repented of the instant sentencing-related circumstances, such as deposit of KRW 1,00,000 as compensation for damage, etc. for the victimF, etc. in the first instance trial, and thus, it is reasonable to respect this given that the lower court’s sentencing was conducted within the reasonable scope of discretion.

Therefore, the prosecutor's improper argument of sentencing is without merit.

In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is without merit and it is in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.