The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the lower court’s punishment (two years of suspended sentence of imprisonment with prison labor for eight months) is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. It is desirable to refrain from rendering a sentence that does not change the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, if the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion. Although the sentence of sentencing of the first instance court falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to refrain from rendering a sentence that does not differ from the first instance court judgment on the sole ground of the difference between the opinion of the appellate court and the opinion of the appellate court (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, the lower court is reasonable to have determined the sentence within a reasonable scope by fully considering the overall circumstances concerning the sentencing of the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant was sentenced to the suspension of the execution of imprisonment for the same kind of crime, the fact that the defendant repeatedly commits an indecent act against the victim, the victim does not want the punishment of the defendant, the degree of conduct, etc., and there is no change in the conditions to be newly considered in the appellate court.

Therefore, the prosecutor's improper argument of sentencing cannot be accepted.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.