The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the sentence (7 million won in penalty, 40 hours in total, and 70 hours in total) imposed by the court below on the defendant is too uneased and unfair.

2. It is reasonable to respect the sentencing of the first instance court when there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In light of the mode of crime, the lower court determined a punishment within a reasonable scope by fully considering the overall circumstances of sentencing, including the following: (a) the case is not less complicated; (b) the damage is not recovered; (c) there is no history of the same crime; and (d) there is no criminal penalty heavier than the fine; (b) the fact that the person is against the attempted crime; and (c) there is no other circumstance to be newly considered in the first instance court; and (d) the sentencing of the lower court cannot be deemed to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion by taking full account of various circumstances, such as the motive, means, and consequence of the crime; and (d) the circumstances after the crime.

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.