2. The crime of this case is acknowledged that the defendant damaged or acquired the victim's fishing gear at the sea and used it without permission, or took the fishery as ship's personnel during the period of suspension of the engineer license. In light of the frequency of the crime and the scale of damage, etc., the defendant was subject to the disposition of suspension of indictment due to the violation of the Fisheries Act. However, the defendant recognized all the charges of this case and made efforts to recover damage, such as the defendant's deposit of KRW 10.4 million for the victim H, KRW 9.36 million for the victim E, KRW 450 million for the victim D, and KRW 4.5 million for the purpose of the violation of the Road Traffic Act, etc. The defendant did not have any criminal history other than once a fine due to the violation of the Road Traffic Act, and there is no other criminal history other than the defendant's age, sex, environment, family relationship, circumstances after the crime, etc., the prosecutor's assertion that the court below's punishment is too unreasonable and it is not justified.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition.