2. On July 9, 2010, the Defendants were sentenced to 6 months of imprisonment with prison labor for special larceny in Busan District Court and 2 years of suspended execution, and committed the instant crime during the suspended execution period.

The crime of larceny in this case committed by the Defendants, along with other accomplices, committed a theft of vehicles by leaving a truck driver’s seat support window crowdfunding of the cargo vehicle parked on three occasions in the way that the Defendants got off of their windows, or opening a door by using a Lin-type iron box and opening a door by using the Lin-type iron box, etc., and thereby driving the vehicle in the way that it is accompanied by the kbox, and the method of crime is large, professional, and degree of damage.

The Defendants’ act of dismantling a stolen vehicle or a large-scale vehicle purchased from a large-scale sales agent without permission in order to punish money by exporting the engine and parts of the vehicle to a foreign country is very heavy.

However, the Defendants did not have any history of criminal punishment in addition to the above suspended sentence, and did not repeat the crime by committing the crime in depth.

The victims do not want to punish the Defendants by mutual agreement with the victims of special larceny.

Defendant

A is responsible for the livelihood of his wife, mother, and female students, and Defendant B is responsible for the livelihood of his parents who are physically disabled persons, and is currently employed in the Car Center and lives faithfully.

In addition, in full view of all the sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments, such as the age, character and conduct, environment, etc. of the Defendants, the sentence imposed by the court below cannot be deemed unfair because it is too uneasible.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, since all of the appeals are without merit.