2. It is recognized that the judgment was based on the following facts: the Defendant’s damage caused by the instant crime was a significant scale; and the Defendant’s failure to recover part of the defaulted check was recognized.

However, in light of the fact that the Defendant recognized the instant crime, there was no record of punishment for the same kind of crime, the Defendant’s failure to pay checks lent to a customer during the course of the Defendant’s operation of the distribution company caused the instant crime, and there were circumstances to be considered. The Defendant appears to have made considerable efforts to recover checks after the company’s default, and the lower court recovered checks exceeding 3/5 of the total face value, and further recovered 13.5 million won per unit (in total face value), and all of the sentencing conditions indicated in the instant argument, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, circumstances of the instant crime, and circumstances after the instant crime, etc., it is difficult to accept the Prosecutor’s assertion. Therefore, it is difficult to accept the Prosecutor’s assertion.

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