However, since only the prosecutor appealed the guilty portion of the judgment below and did not appeal all the prosecutor and the defendant with respect to the dismissal of public prosecution, the dismissal of public prosecution in the judgment below becomes final and conclusive and only the remaining guilty portion is subject to the judgment of this court

2. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal (two months of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution) is too unfluent and unfair.

3. The fact that the sum of the wages the Defendant did not pay is approximately KRW 43 million, and that the Defendant was punished for the same kind of crime, and that the employee J and H still filed an application to the effect that the Defendant would be punished for the same offense, is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

However, considering favorable circumstances, such as the Defendant’s recognition of the instant crime, the Defendant’s attitude to reflect the Defendant’s act, the Defendant’s endeavor to pay the employees with the delayed wage, and the Defendant’s partial payment of the employees J and H’s delayed wage when the Defendant was in the trial, as well as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, background of the instant crime, and circumstances after the instant crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court is too uneasible and unreasonable.

Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is without merit.

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