2. The receipt of similar judgments causes confusion in the financial transaction order, leads to a large amount of victims in a short period of time, and leads victims to a serious economic difficulty, etc. Therefore, there is a high level of social harm, such as the nature of the crime, the necessity of strict punishment, and the fact that there is no agreement with the victims.

On the other hand, the defendant is the first offender who has not been subject to any criminal punishment, and the defendant was actively involved in the crime of this case led by D and E, which is co-offenders, and the amount of direct investment attracting by the defendant is not much more than the amount of investment, and the defendant also seems to have suffered losses due to the failure to recover the amount after investing a considerable amount in the business of this case. In addition, the victim recovered approximately KRW 12 million out of the amount of 70 million investment, and the victim deposited KRW 35,987,250 to the victim according to the result of related civil litigation in the trial.

In addition, in full view of the background of the instant crime, circumstances after the instant crime, Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, etc., as well as the application of the sentencing guidelines of the Supreme Court sentencing committee, the prosecutor’s assertion is without merit, on the grounds that the lower court’s punishment is too uneasible and inappropriate.

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