2. The following are circumstances: (a) the Defendant had the same criminal records several times; (b) the victims, other than K, have not been recovered from damage; and (c) the Defendant committed the instant crime during the suspension of execution after the conviction of the case, such as the Defendant’s violation of the Labor Standards Act, or committed the instant case during the trial.

On the other hand, it is advantageous to the fact that the defendant recognized all of the crimes of this case and reflected against some victims, and that some of the crimes of this case should be considered in relation to ex post concurrent crimes with the crime of violating the Labor Standards Act which was established.

In addition, in full view of the circumstances leading up to the instant crime, the circumstances following the instant crime, the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, and environment, as well as various sentencing conditions indicated in the instant records and arguments, the Prosecutor’s assertion is rejected on the grounds that the lower court’s punishment is too unjustifiable and unreasonable.

3. The prosecutor's appeal of conclusion is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that the appeal is groundless