The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unlawful in sentencing) is unreasonable as it is too unfasible to the sentence imposed by the court below (one year and six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, surveillance of protection, community service order 160 hours, 40 hours of lecture order of compliance driving, and 40 hours of lecture order of compliance driving).

2. There is no change in the terms and conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and where the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the lower court on the ground that new sentencing materials related to the unfavorable circumstances in the trial are not submitted, and there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the lower court. The reason for sentencing asserted by the prosecutor appears to have been sufficiently considered by the lower court in determining the punishment.

In addition, examining the following conditions of sentencing, such as the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, background, and circumstances after the commission of the crime, etc., the lower court’s sentence against the Defendant is too unaffortable and unfair as it goes beyond the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. The appeal by the prosecutor of the conclusion is without merit, and is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.