The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Sentencing sentencing on the gist of the grounds for appeal (the sentence of the lower court: a fine of three million won);

2. Determination

A. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

B. The lower court: (a) took into account the following circumstances: (b) under the circumstances: (c) the Defendant committed an act of seriously opposing the Defendant’s wrong conduct; (d) the degree of actual damage was 1.2 million won, excluding the part of the rent already paid to the victim within a short period of time, and the extent of damage was insignificant; (c) the Defendant refused to return the vehicle without any additional rent corresponding thereto; (d) without any contact with the victim; and (e) without any contact with the victim, and (e) without any contact with the victim; and (e) it was difficult for the victim to grasp the location of the vehicle; and (e) the damage was not recovered; and (e) the Defendant took account of the following factors: (e) when the judgment became final and conclusive; and (e) the Defendant’s age and the Defendant’s environment records, motive, means, and motive of the instant crime; and (e) the Defendant’s failure to contact the victim within a short period of time; and (e) thus, (e) the extent of damage was minor; and (e) the Defendant did not have any previous criminal conviction.

(c)

The reason for the court below's improper sentencing, as claimed by the prosecutor, seems to be the reason for the court below's determination of the defendant's punishment, and the above conditions of sentencing changed otherwise.

There is no circumstance to see the above sentencing conditions, and considering the above sentencing conditions, the court below's punishment is made within the reasonable scope of discretion.