2. The Defendant, on the ground that he did not receive any wage from the victim, is not highly likely to commit a crime in that he/she can find it in a restaurant operated by the victim and interfered with his/her duties, and that he/she continued to commit a crime after a police officer called up on one occasion upon the victim’s report

Furthermore, the defendant has a lot of criminal records such as punishment of imprisonment with prison labor for violent crimes, and even during the period of repeated crime due to fraud, there is a high possibility of criticism in that he has committed the crime of this case.

However, in full view of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant reflects the Defendant’s mistake; (b) the Defendant did not exercise the direct tangible power against the victim; (c) the victim was agreed upon and that the victim does not want punishment against the Defendant; and (d) the Defendant’s age, character, character, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime; and (e) other various circumstances, which are conditions for sentencing as indicated in the argument of the instant case, such as the circumstances after the crime, etc., it cannot be deemed that the sentence imposed by

3. The prosecutor's appeal of conclusion is without merit, and it is dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.