2. Each of the instant offenses is an unfavorable circumstance, where the Defendant had been in arrears with the employee E’s wages and retirement allowances, and the nature of the offense is not good in light of the amount of overdue wages and retirement allowances, and the fact that the Defendant has failed to reach an agreement with the victimized employee.

However, in the civil lawsuit brought against D by the victimized employee against the Defendant, the following circumstances are favorable: (a) the Defendant made confession of all of the instant crimes with no criminal records; and (b) the content that “stock company D shall pay the above employee the overdue wage and retirement allowance of KRW 21 million in installments on three occasions in the civil lawsuit brought by the victimized employee against D, which is operated by the Defendant; and (c) the Defendant is currently performing the installment payment under the above conciliation.”

Considering the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and background of the crime, the means and consequence of the crime, and various conditions of sentencing indicated in the instant records and pleadings, including the circumstances after the crime, the lower court’s judgment cannot be deemed unreasonable to have exceeded, or maintain, the reasonable bounds of discretion.

Therefore, the prosecutor's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal 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.