2. In full view of the factors such as the fact that the Defendant was subject to criminal punishment several times of fraud, the fact that damage recovery is not performed at all, and the fact that the Defendant committed the crime in order to raise living expenses on the condition that the amount of money acquired by the Defendant is set out in multiple ways; the favorable sentencing factors such as the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime; and other various circumstances that form the conditions of sentencing as indicated in the record and the theory of change in the sentencing guidelines, including the circumstances after the crime, and the scope of the recommended sentencing guidelines (from June to June), the lower court’s punishment against the Defendant is too uneasible and unreasonable.

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.