The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (the imprisonment of eight months and the fine of five hundred thousand won) is too unhued 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, and where the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect them. Although the sentence of the first instance court falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to refrain from rendering a sentence that does not vary with the first instance court on the sole ground that the difference between the opinion of the appellate court and the opinion of the appellate court (Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In accordance with the foregoing legal doctrine, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the lower court on the grounds that new materials were not submitted in the trial and that the sentencing of the first instance court is too unfford, and it is not recognized that the sentencing of the lower court exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, taking full account of all the reasons for sentencing presented by the lower court.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices. However, since it is obvious that the phrase “Article 38(1)2” in the judgment of the court below is omitted by mistake after the phrase “Article 38(1)2” in the category of aggravated concurrent crimes, among the judgment of the court below, it is obvious that the phrase “Article 38(1)3” was omitted by mistake, it is corrected to add