The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year of imprisonment and one year of suspension of qualification) on the gist of the grounds of appeal is deemed to be too unhutiled and unfair.

2. Determination

A. The phrase "when the circumstances before the opening of the suspension of sentence" refer to cases where even if the sentence is not imposed in light of the overall conditions of sentencing as stipulated in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, including the degree of reflectivity, even if the sentence is not imposed, it means cases where the defendant again commits a crime. Unlike this, the phrase "when the circumstances before the opening of the sentence is obvious" means cases where the defendant completely repents a crime. It does not mean that the suspension of sentence cannot be always granted in cases where the defendant denies a crime without confession of the crime. Further, matters concerning Article 51 of the Criminal Act and whether the opening of the sentence is obvious fall under the court's discretion on the determination of the punishment (see Supreme Court Decision 201Do6138, Feb. 20, 2003; Supreme Court Decision 2001Do6138, Feb. 20, 200). According to the above legal principle, the sentencing of the court below is justified in light of the above legal principles, and the sentencing guidelines presented by the appellate court below to the extent of sentencing 251.

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 (Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure. However, the two-party 29,20 of the judgment of the court below in accordance with Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure and Articles 37 (former part), 38(1)2, and 50 (the sentence is a violation of the Act on the Protection of Communications Secrets with heavy penalty).