2. The Defendant committed the crime of this case, such as joining the NAV’s website, pretending to have sold goods, by deceiving money from those who belong to it through several times, and by deceiving another person’s motor vehicle and forging and using a forged motor vehicle registration certificate. The circumstances and contents leading to the crime of this case, in particular, the crime of fraud committed against many and unspecified persons, and the fact that there was a very poor record of punishment for juvenile protective disposition and fine, and that there was no all damage recovery measures up to the trial, etc. are disadvantageous to the Defendant.

However, in full view of the following factors: (a) the Defendant led to the instant crime and committed the instant crime for more than three months; (b) there is no record of criminal punishment in excess of the fine yet; (c) the victims H and N have agreed with the H and N; (d) the victims have taken measures to recover damage to R and T; and (d) the Defendant’s age, family environment, and circumstances before and after the instant crime; and (c) the Defendant’s punishment against the Defendant is too uneasible and unreasonable.

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