2. The Defendants committed the instant crime even during the suspension of execution, and the representative director of the victim company suffered enormous damages, such as the deterioration of the image of the company, due to the instant crime committed by the Defendants, and wanting to punish the Defendants.

However, the Defendants’ confession to commit the instant crime and reflect in depth their mistake; the benefits acquired by the Defendants were not so significant due to the instant crime; Defendant A promised to waive the claim for unpaid wages and retirement allowances against the victim company; making efforts to recover the damage; and Defendant B did not have any record of punishment for the same kind of crime.

In addition to the above circumstances, considering various conditions of sentencing specified in the records and arguments of this case, such as the Defendants’ age, sexual conduct, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, etc., the judgment of the court below cannot be deemed to have exceeded the reasonable bounds of discretion or to be unfair to maintain them as they are.

Therefore, the prosecutor's improper argument of sentencing is without merit.

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