The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unhued and unfair.

2. The judgment of unfair sentencing refers to the case where the sentence of the judgment of the court below is too heavy or too minor in light of the content of the specific case.

Based on the statutory penalty, the sentencing is a discretionary judgment that takes place within a reasonable and appropriate scope by comprehensively taking into account the conditions of the sentencing prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act based on the statutory penalty, and there is a unique area of the first instance court in our Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the direct principle.

In addition to these circumstances and the ex post facto nature of the appellate court, if there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court is not beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). The lower court, in light of the background, content, and outcome of the instant crime, determined a sentence by considering the following favorable circumstances: (a) the extent of damage is serious; (b) the victim of the crime resulting from rape and bodily shock; (c) the victim has not recovered from damage; and (d) the victim has not been punished; (c) the victim has no criminal history exceeding fines; (d) the Defendant suffered from the mental disorder of stimulative disorder before several years; and (e) each of the instant crimes appears to have been committed under weak mental and physical conditions due to the occurrence of the above mental disorder; and (e) the Defendant, as a patient suffering from mental illness, is expected to need mental treatment rather than mere severe punishment; and (e) the Defendant was sentenced to a sentence by considering the favorable circumstances that the mental therapy would be necessary.

In full view of the reasoning of the lower judgment’s sentencing and the fact that the Defendant was sentenced to medical treatment and custody, the lower court.