The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The reasoning of the appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (three million won in penalty) is too unfluent and unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the lower court’s judgment and the sentencing of the lower court is not beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, it is desirable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). There is no change in circumstances in matters on which the conditions of sentencing are attached after the sentence of the lower judgment.

Defendant reflects wrong and has no record of the same kind of crime.

It cannot be viewed as a tort such as lending of access media or taking part in licensing crimes.

In full view of such circumstances as well as the motive of the crime, the details and contents of the crime, and the conditions of the sentencing as shown in the pleadings after the crime was committed, the sentencing of the lower court is too unhued and so it exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, even considering the circumstances alleged by the prosecutor as the grounds for

subsection (b) of this section.

We do not accept the prosecutor's improper argument of sentencing.

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.