The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

The prosecutor's assertion of misunderstanding the facts is found to be erroneous in the judgment of the court below, since it is proved that the defendant committed a crime of intrusion upon the victim's residence according to the evidence submitted.

The argument is asserted.

However, examining the various circumstances cited by the court below with the record and closely, even if the prosecutor considered all the contents of the appeal, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone alone proves that this part of the facts charged is beyond reasonable doubt.

We affirm the judgment of the court below that it is difficult to view.

There is no error of misunderstanding of facts as argued by the prosecutor.

We do not accept the prosecutor's assertion.

2. Where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the lower court’s judgment on the prosecutor’s unfair argument of sentencing, and the lower court’s sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it shall be respected (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In this case, there is no particular change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the lower court’s judgment, since the new materials of sentencing were not submitted by the said court.

In addition, in full view of the sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments of the instant case, the sentence imposed by the lower court against the Defendant was excessively unhutiled and exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

shall not be deemed to exist.

We do not accept the prosecutor's assertion disputing the propriety of sentencing of the court below.

3. The appeal by the conclusion prosecutor is dismissed for reasons.