2. The lower court rendered the above sentence by taking into account the favorable circumstances, such as the fact that the account connected with the leased medium was only one, and that Defendant A was the first offender, and Defendant B did not have any criminal record heavier than the same criminal record or fine.

In addition to the circumstances considered by the court below, the approach media transferred seems not to have been actually used for licensing crimes shall be considered in light of the favorable circumstances.

In full view of the Defendants’ age, sex, environment, health, circumstances leading to the commission of the crime, means and result, scale of the crime and circumstances after the crime, etc., which can be known through records and pleadings, the sentence sentenced by the court below seems to be appropriate, and the judgment of the court below exceeded the reasonable limit of discretion.

There is no circumstance that the assessment or maintenance thereof is deemed unfair (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). Therefore, it is difficult to view that the sentence imposed by the lower court is unfair because it is too unfasible as the prosecutor asserts.

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.