The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The judgment of the court below on the gist of the grounds of appeal is too unfilled and unreasonable.

2. The determination of sentencing is based on the statutory penalty, based on the discretionary determination that takes place within a reasonable and appropriate scope by taking into account the factors constituting the conditions for sentencing as prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, and there is a unique area of the first deliberation in our criminal litigation law taking the trial-oriented principle and the principle of directness.

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 of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of the discretion. Although the sentence of the first instance falls within the reasonable scope of the discretion, it is desirable to reverse the judgment of the first instance on the sole ground that the sentence of the first instance falls within the scope of the discretion of the appellate court and to refrain from imposing a sentence that does not differ from the first instance court (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). Since the new materials were not submitted in the first instance court as to the instant case, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the lower court, and even if the grounds for the sentencing stated by the lower court are fully considered, it is not recognized that the sentencing of the lower court is too unfilled and goes beyond the reasonable scope of the discretion.

We cannot accept the prosecutor's improper argument of sentencing.

3. The appeal by the prosecutor of the conclusion is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.