2. The judgment of the defendant committed the crime of this case in a planned and consistent manner, the crime of this case was committed repeatedly over a long period and the amount of damage is also very large. However, the defendant has already paid a considerable amount of money in cash (payment of KRW 75 million prior to complaint, KRW 2.2 million, and KRW 75 million as the defendant sold the apartment house which provided the victim's security prior to the prosecution of this case). The victim Corporation received KRW 100 million from the Seoul Guarantee Insurance Co., Ltd. as insurance money related to the contract of fidelity guarantee. The defendant transferred the right to refund the lease deposit amount of KRW 120 million to the victim, and it seems that the victim's complainant also transferred the right to return the lease deposit amount of KRW 120 million to the victim, the defendant was the first offender, the defendant was subject to disciplinary action against the victim, the defendant appears to have retired from the victim corporation, and the circumstances and circumstances of the crime of this case, including new circumstances and changes in the victim's environment and records, are recognized.

Therefore, the prosecutor's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

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