The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The lower court’s sentence (7 million won in penalty) against the Defendant on the summary of the grounds of appeal is deemed to be too unhutiled and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Based on the statutory penalty, the sentencing is determined within a reasonable and appropriate scope by comprehensively taking into account the factors constituting the conditions for sentencing as stipulated in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, based on which our criminal litigation law, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the principle of directness, has a unique area for the first deliberation of sentencing.

In addition, in light of these circumstances and the ex post facto in-depth nature of the appellate court, it is reasonable to respect the sentencing in the event that there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing in the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion. Although the sentence of sentencing in the first instance falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, it is desirable to refrain from rendering a sentence that does not differ from the first instance court on the sole basis of the difference between the appellate court’s opinion and the appellate court’s opinion (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). (b) In light of the above legal principles, it is desirable to refrain from rendering a judgment of the first instance court by destroying the first instance court’s judgment and rendering a sentence that does not vary from the first instance court’s judgment (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015).

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 prosecutor's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.