2. The judgment of the defendant is based on the favorable circumstances such as the crime of larceny in 2007, the fine for larceny in 2007, the punishment of the fine for larceny in 2007, the fact that the defendant was punished for larceny in 2010, the fact that the defendant did not agree with the victim is disadvantageous, or that the defendant is found to have recognized and opposed to his mistake. The crime of this case is in the concurrent relation between the crime of forgery of a private signature, which became final and conclusive on August 20, 2013 and the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and there is a need to consider equity with the case where the defendant is adjudicated at the same time, and considering all the sentencing conditions indicated in this case, such as the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, the background and result of the crime of this case, the prosecutor's assertion is not reasonable since it is too unreasonable.

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