The sentence of the court below (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, 120 hours of community service order) is too unhued and unfair.

2. The crime of this case is acknowledged that the act of aiding and abetting and abetting the act of fraud of a person who has not obtained a name in return for the Defendant’s lending, by transferring the check card, providing another person with a deposit account under the name of the Defendant and the name of the Defendant, and withdrawing and delivering the money deposited in the account, and as such, aiding and abetting the act of fraud of a person who has not obtained a name in return for the Defendant’s lending, in light of the method and content of the crime, etc., the crime is considerably poor; the amount of damage to the crime of aiding and abetting and abetting and raising up to KRW 17 million in total; since the crime of aiding and abetting and abetting and aiding and abetting the crime is very serious social harm, it is also necessary to punish the act of aiding and abetting and abetting and abetting it.

However, in full view of the following: (a) the Defendant recognized the instant crime; (b) the instant fraud is not a principal offender but a aiding and abetting crime; (c) the Defendant appears to have no profit from such aiding and abetting; and (d) the Defendant has no criminal record other than a fine for one-time traffic crime; and (c) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and background leading to the instant crime; (d) the means and consequence of the instant crime; and (e) the circumstances after the commission of the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is deemed unreasonable.

Therefore, the prosecutor's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

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