2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court determined that the crime of Bosing was committed systematically, planned, and intelligently, causing serious damage to the unspecified number of victims, and that it is not easy to recover such damage, and that there is a great need to strictly punish the participants of the crime, and that the crime of this case, which the Defendant served as the so-called “passing”, was committed by the Defendant as an act of aiding and abetting the Defendant in that the economic interest in the crime of Bosing accounts for an important part that is realized in the crime of Bosing.

Even if the degree of participation in the crime is less than that of the crime.

In light of the extenuating circumstances, the Defendant recognized the instant crime and against the Defendant, and determined the Defendant’s punishment by taking into account the favorable circumstances that are the first offender with no criminal history, and there is no change in the special sentencing conditions that could change the Defendant’s punishment after the lower court was sentenced.

In addition, taking into account the various sentencing conditions shown in the pleadings of the instant case, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive and background of the offense, means and consequence, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, as it is too unhued.

shall not be effective.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion 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 grounds that the appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.