2. Determination

A. The instant crime committed by acquiring a loan by submitting a false marriage report and a charter agreement, etc., and by taking advantage of the employee’s lease loan system with public funds for the stabilization of the housing of homeless workers. The method is planned, and the nature of the crime is not very good due to threatening the foundation of the national welfare system, and the damage is not recovered, and there is an unfavorable circumstance to the Defendants.

B. However, in light of the fact that the Defendants divided their actions into a mistake, there is no same criminal power against the Defendants, in particular, Defendant B is a primary offender, and most of the amount acquired by the crime of this case was used by Defendant A as the hinterland, Defendant A appears to have acquired KRW 2 million, Defendant B appears to have acquired KRW 3 million, Defendant B, the title of the instant loan, and Defendant B, the title of the instant loan, appears to have repaid the instant loan in a certain monthly amount, and all other circumstances that are conditions for sentencing, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc., the sentence of the lower court is too unreasonable.

C. 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 ground that it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.