2. The fact that there was three times of punishment, including punishment for the same previous conviction for judgment, and that the act of deception is active, not agreed with the victim, and that there was no particular effort to recover damage, by providing the lease deposit with a financial institution as security, which is provided as security.

On the other hand, there are more favorable circumstances such as the fact that the defendant recognized the crime, the victim recovered the degree of 2.8 million won through the compulsory execution procedure and partly recovered the damage, the fact that there is no criminal record for the same kind of crime after the previous conviction in 2008, the beneficiary of basic living, and the minor child who must support because it is not good for health.

In light of the above various circumstances, comprehensively taking into account the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, and environment, etc., the lower court’s punishment cannot be deemed to be excessively light beyond the reasonable limit of discretion.

3. The prosecutor's appeal of 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.