2. On May 15, 2014, the lower court rendered a sentence by taking into account the following factors: (a) the Defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment with prison labor for fraud and two years at the Ulsan District Court on August 26, 2016; (b) the Defendant committed the instant crime during the repeated crime period after the enforcement of the sentence was completed on August 26, 2016; (c) the Defendant had been punished for the same kind of crime, other than the aforementioned previous criminal records, under the circumstances unfavorable to him/her; (d) the Defendant appears to have committed an opposite attitude in the confession; and (e) the Defendant’s deposit of KRW 2,200,000 in total in order to recover damage during the trial process; and (e) the Defendant’s age, sex behavior, environment, motive and means of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc.

The grounds for the improper sentencing of the prosecutor's assertion (including the poor quality of the crime, the fact that the crime was committed again despite the number of the same records, the fact that the crime was committed during the period of repeated crime, and the fact that the damage was not recovered) appear to have been sufficiently considered in determining the punishment against the defendant, and the above changes in the above sentencing conditions have been made.

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.