The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment for not less than eight months, two years of suspended sentence, and one hundred and sixty hours of community service) of the lower court is deemed to be too unfasible and unfair;

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the judgment of the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared with the lower court’s failure to submit new sentencing data at the trial and the lower court, and in full view of the factors revealed in the instant argument, the lower court’s sentencing is too unfluent and so it does not seem to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. The prosecutor's appeal of conclusion is without merit, and it is dismissed pursuant to Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.

[In accordance with Article 25(1) of the Rules of Criminal Procedure, ex officio, Article 25(1) of the judgment of the court below is to delete “the choice of punishment” and “the choice of imprisonment” under Article 20 of the Criminal Procedure Act and Article 21 of the Rules of Criminal Procedure, and to add “Article 40 of the Criminal Procedure Act, Article 50 (Mutual Crimes No. 2 of the Criminal Code No. 1)” and “the choice of each sentence of imprisonment,” on the 3th page 1.