The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The circumstances, such as the victim’s severe carbon, alleged by the prosecutor as an element of sentencing in this court, are already revealed to have been taken full account of the sentencing in the court below’s oral proceedings, and there is no particular change in circumstances in the matters subject to sentencing after the sentence of the court below is rendered.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of all the factors of sentencing as shown in the argument of the instant case, such as the Defendant’s age, sex and environment, motive for committing a crime, and circumstances after committing a crime, the sentencing of the lower court cannot be deemed to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion as it is excessively unhued.

The prosecutor’s assertion disputing the propriety of sentencing of the court below is not accepted.

2. In full view of various circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, social relation, criminal records, the risk of recidivism, the details and contents of the crime, the degree of disadvantage the Defendant was put to the public due to an order of disclosure notification, anticipated side effects and the results of comparative balancing between expected interests and the expected effects of the prevention of sexual crimes, etc., there are special circumstances in which disclosure of the Defendant’s personal information should not be disclosed.

Recognized.

We affirm the judgment of the court below to the same purport.

This part of the Prosecutor's argument is not accepted.

3. The appeal by the prosecutor of the conclusion is dismissed on the ground of appeal.