2. The conclusion that the Defendant committed the instant crime during the period of the same repeated crime, and that the amount of defraudation is not certain as KRW 36 million is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

However, the Defendant paid KRW 29 million to the victim by January 9, 2019, and the victim submitted a written agreement to the court of the lower court that the Defendant would not want the Defendant’s punishment on January 28, 2019, and the Defendant made efforts to recover damage, such as repayment of additional KRW 2 million on February 12, 2019, and the Defendant has no other criminal record other than the repeated crime that was sentenced to six months of imprisonment due to fraud, are favorable to the Defendant.

As above, comprehensively taking account of the circumstances favorable to the Defendant as well as unfavorable circumstances, and comprehensively taking account of the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and circumstances leading to the instant crime, and the circumstances before and after the instant crime, etc., the lower court’s sentencing judgment cannot be deemed to go too far beyond the reasonable bounds of discretion, and thus, the Prosecutor’s assertion of unfair sentencing is rejected.

3. The prosecutor's appeal of conclusion 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.