2. Each of the instant crimes committed by the Defendant, by deceiving the victims 15 times in total, is disadvantageous to the Defendant, who obtained a delivery of rice 578 throsts equivalent to the market price of KRW 31,761,00, and acquired it by deception. The sum of the amount obtained by deception is not significant, and it is not agreed with the victims until now.

However, all of the crimes of this case committed by the Defendant, while making a confession of each of the crimes of this case, is against the depth of the Defendant, and the Defendant transferred all of the damages to the victim K, L,O, and Q at the lower court. The Defendant appears to have been trying to recover from damage by remitting part of the damages to the victim D, G, H, I, J, J, J, N, R, R, R, and U in the first instance trial. Each of the crimes of this case is in the relation of a single concurrent crime after Article 37 of the Criminal Act with another crime for which the judgment has become final and conclusive, and thus, should consider equity with the case where the judgment was rendered simultaneously. The Defendant is a person with disabilities of Grade 6 due to the age of 75, with disabilities of the Defendant, and

Considering the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., as well as the aforementioned circumstances, various sentencing conditions indicated in the instant records and arguments, the lower court’s sentencing cannot be deemed unfair to have exceeded the reasonable bounds of discretion or 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 on the grounds that the appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.