The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (7 million won in penalty) is too unfluent and unreasonable.

2. Under our criminal litigation law, which takes the principle of trial-oriented and directness, there exists no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court in relation to the determination of sentencing, and where the sentencing of the first instance does not exceed the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In this case, there is no change in sentencing conditions compared to the lower court’s judgment. As there is no particular change in sentencing conditions, the following: (a) the details and details of the instant injury crime; (b) the degree of injury to the victim; (c) the Defendant committed the instant crime during the suspension period of the execution of imprisonment due to the crime of injury; (d) the Defendant did not make any effort to recover damage; and (e) the Defendant’s previous conviction and character environment; and (e) the various conditions of sentencing indicated in the arguments and the records of the instant case, the lower court’s sentence was too unfilled and is not recognized to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

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.