The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

The defendant, in the appellate court, has agreed with the victim's side and the victim's wife in the judgment of the court of appeal.

For the aged of 69 years old, all of the crimes of this case were led to confessions and their errors are divided.

It seems that the crime was not planned, and there is no record of the same sex crime.

As the most important thing, the social relationship seems to be relatively clear in supporting the wife and children.

All these circumstances constitute positive factors among the reasons for the suspension of the execution of imprisonment with prison labor determined by the Supreme Court Sentencing Committee.

In light of the following factors, considering that the Defendant’s character and behavior, the environment, motive and background of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., various sentencing conditions as shown in the instant pleadings were collected, the lower court’s sentencing (two years of imprisonment, three years of suspended sentence, three years of fine, 200,000 won, and 40 hours of order) cannot be deemed to have reached the degree of destruction because it is too unfasible.

We do not accept the argument of the prosecutor disputing this.

2. In full view of the following: (a) the Defendant’s age, social relationship, criminal record, and risk of repeating a crime; (b) details of the crime; and (c) the Defendant’s disadvantage resulting from the disclosure notification order; (d) the anticipated side effect; and (e) comparative balancing between the expected side effect; and (e) the expected effect of the disclosure notification order; and (e) the Defendant’s personal information should not

Recognized.

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

The pre-inspection argument cannot be accepted under the premise different from this.

3. The final appeal is dismissed for lack of reason.