The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the legal principles, Article 5-2(4) of the former Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (amended by Act No. 11731, Apr. 5, 2013; hereinafter the same shall apply), the applicable provisions of the indictment, which are applicable provisions of the indictment, shall apply at the time of the crime.

Article 5-2(4) of the former Aggravated Punishment Act was amended on April 5, 2013, and Article 5-2(4) of the former Aggravated Punishment Act was deleted. However, this is merely to cope with a modified social phenomenon, and it does not constitute “where the former Aggravated Punishment itself was unfair or where the statute was amended or amended in light of reflect that the punishment itself was excessive.” As such, Article 1(2) of the Criminal Act does not apply.

Article 5-2(4) of the former Aggravated Punishment Act, which is a law at the time of the act, shall apply to the crime of this case according to Article 1(1) of the Criminal Act.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that did not apply Article 5-2(4) of the former Specialization Act by applying Article 1(2) of the Criminal Act, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment, and two years of suspended execution) is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Judgment on misapprehension of legal principles

A. The provisions of Article 1(2) of the Criminal Act or Article 326 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act are unfair due to the change of the legal ideology that served as the reason for the enactment of penal statutes.

It shall be interpreted that the Act shall apply to cases where the Act was amended or amended in light of the anti-discrimination that excessive punishment was excessive, and in cases where the Act was amended or amended to cope with special needs at that time, such as the change of regulatory methods for traffic order, etc., the Act was amended or amended since there was no reason to extinguish or reduce punishment for the violation committed at the time of the former Act.

even at the time of action.