The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds of appeal (two years of suspended execution, observation of protection, community service order 120 hours, drinking-related medical treatment order in the six-month period of imprisonment) is too uneasy and unfair.

2. 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 such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court, as indicated in its reasoning, determined the Defendant’s punishment by comprehensively taking into account the favorable circumstances and unfavorable circumstances for the Defendant.

The circumstances alleged by the prosecutor on the grounds of appeal are already considered in the sentencing process of the court below, and there is no new change in circumstances that could change the sentence of the court below in the trial.

When comprehensively considering the sentencing conditions, such as the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, as shown in the arguments of the lower court and the party deliberation, and the scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines, the lower court’s punishment cannot be deemed to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion or to be unfair because it is too low.

3. According to the conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition.