2. The lower court rendered a sentence by taking account of the circumstances favorable to the Defendant’s primary offender, and taking account of the following factors: (a) the Defendant’s reliance on the victim’s trust was stolen and the nature of the offense was bad; and (b) the amount of damage was considerably damaged by KRW 139,910,000 among them, and the remainder was paid KRW 40,000,000, and the amount was not recovered; and (c) the Defendant’s primary offender was the first offender; and (d) the sentence was imposed by taking account of various factors indicated in the instant records and arguments, such as the Defendant’s age, sexual behavior, environment, motive and means of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc.

The reason for the improper sentencing (the gravity of a crime, the poorness of a crime, the recovery of damage, the victim's severe punishment, etc.) alleged by the prosecutor appears to be the reason that the court below has already considered the punishment of the defendant in determining the punishment of the defendant, and otherwise changed the above sentencing conditions.

There is no circumstance to see the above sentencing conditions, and considering the above sentencing conditions, the sentence of the court below is determined to be reasonable within the reasonable scope of discretion.

The prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

3. The appeal by the prosecutor of the conclusion 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.