2. In light of the means, methods, etc. of the instant crime committed by the Defendant, there is no disadvantage to the Defendant, such as that the nature of the crime is less severe in light of the means, etc. of the instant crime committed by the Defendant, and that some victims (Dong Fire, Postal Mutual Aid Association) have not been able to recover full damage or complete recovery from the agreement, but on the other hand, the Defendant has made a confession of all the instant crime and made a statement that the mistake is divided, there is no penalty power against the Defendant, the Defendant has paid insurance money to the victim Han Lan Property Insurance Co., Ltd. in the course of investigation, and the Defendant has been able to take advantage of the fact that the above victim was her wife, and the lower court appears to have been sentenced to a fine of KRW 80,000,00 considering the various circumstances of the Defendant at the lower court, and taking into account the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, intelligence and environment, the motive, means and consequence of the instant crime, the circumstances after the crime, and family relationship, etc., the Defendant’s assertion is not justified.

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.