The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The lower court’s sentence (two years of suspended execution, surveillance of protection, community service order 80 hours, and 40 hours of order to attend a lecture in October) of the gist of the grounds for appeal is too unfasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The sentencing guidelines established by the sentencing committee based on Articles 81-2 and 81-6 of the Act on the Organization of Courts for the Sentencing (hereinafter “Sentencing guidelines”) are “reasonable, concrete, and objective setting” through the “procedures prescribed by the Act” in order to realize “fair, objective sentencing that makes citizens trust,” and “public disclosure”. Judges shall respect the type of punishment selected and the scope of punishment determined (see Articles 81-2 through 81-12 of the Court Organization Act). In a case where a court must state the grounds for sentencing in the written sentencing upon a judgment deviating from the sentencing guidelines, it shall state the grounds in a way that it expresses the relevant sentencing in a reasonable and persuasive manner, taking into account the factors, effects, etc. of the sentencing guidelines (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do7410, Dec. 9, 2010).

(c)

If the judgment of the court below and its propriety are comprehensively considered in light of the conditions of sentencing as shown in the pleadings until the court below decided the circumstances and the trial of the party, the court below's sentence is too minor on the grounds that the sentence imposed by attaching a suspended sentence on the grounds that the risk of recidivism of the defendant is not high within the scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines, for

It is difficult to see it.

The prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

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.