The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant and the claimant for the observation order of the protected juvenile (hereinafter “Defendant”) (limited to three years of imprisonment and five years of suspended execution) are deemed to be too uneasy and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. It is desirable to refrain from rendering a sentence that does not vary from the judgment of the court of first instance compared to the judgment of the court of first instance if there is no change in the conditions of sentencing, and the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion. Although the sentence of the first instance falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to refrain from rendering a sentence that does not vary from the judgment of the court of first instance solely on the ground that the opinion of the appellate court differs from the opinion of the court of first instance (Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In light of the foregoing legal principles, it is desirable to refrain from imposing a sentence that does not vary from the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of first instance on the grounds that new sentencing data are not submitted in the health room and the trial, and there is relatively little injury suffered by the victims and the defendant is expressed by the victims.

B. As long as the prosecutor filed an appeal against the Defendant’s case, it shall be deemed that the prosecutor filed an appeal against the attachment order case and the protective observation order case pursuant to Articles 9(8) and 21-8 of the Act on the Protection and Observation of Specific Criminal Offenders and the Electronic Monitoring, Etc., but the prosecutor’s petition of appeal or the reasons for appeal are not indicated in the prosecutor’s appeal or the reasons for appeal. Moreover, even if examining the judgment below, there is no ground for reversal of this part ex officio.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act and Article 35 of the Act on the Protection and Observation of Specific Criminal Offenders and Electronic Monitoring, etc., on the ground that it is without merit.