2. Determination

A. The crime of this case is not proper in that the substitute payment system was abused to contribute to the stabilization of the livelihood of retired workers without receiving wages, etc. by pretending the delayed payment of wages, etc., by obtaining substitute payments of KRW 76,733,210 by fraudulent means, and by facilitating other business operators to commit the crime of fraud and violation of the Wage Claim Guarantee Act, and thus, it is unfavorable for the Defendant to commit the crime of this case. The Defendant led the employees to participate in the crime of this case, and the employees received substitute payments and additional collection notification from the State.

B. However, in full view of the fact that the Defendant’s mistake is against himself, the same criminal records do not exist, the substitute payment received from the instant crime is mostly used by the relevant workers, and the Defendant appears to have returned a part of the said workers’ substitute payment, such as the substitute payment, etc. of the said workers, and other circumstances that form the conditions for sentencing, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, it cannot be deemed that 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.