The appeal by the prosecutor is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor for 8 months and 2 years of suspended execution) is deemed to be too uneasible and unfair.

2. The Defendant: (a) destroyed and stolen bicycles using a small cutting machine on seven occasions; and (b) destroyed and stolen bicycles; and (c) was not good enough to commit a crime.

However, there are extenuating circumstances, such as the defendant's mistake in depth and there is no record of criminal punishment, that the defendant agreed with the victims or deposited the amount equivalent to the amount of damage (five persons agreed upon and two persons deposited), and other various sentencing conditions, such as the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, motive for crime, means and result, circumstances after the crime, and the scope of recommended sentences according to the sentencing guidelines of the Supreme Court Sentencing Commission for each of the crimes of this case is from six months to nine months, and the first and second crimes (attached Table 4 and six crimes table 6): thief type 2 (general larceny), thief type for general property, decision on the recommended area, recommendation sentence range (basic area), thief type 4 (i.e., theft) for general property, thief type 4 (i.g., special criminal punishment), 4 (ii) for a period not exceeding six months to six months, 4) for a significant reason for suspended sentence (special punishment).

3. The prosecutor’s appeal for 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. Pursuant to Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, each of the criminal facts constituting one, two, and four types of crimes as indicated in the judgment of the court below.