2. The conclusion is based on the following facts: (a) the Defendant repeatedly committed the instant crime against many victims and the nature of the instant crime is not weak; and (b) the Defendant has been punished twice for the same type of fraud crimes, etc.; and (c) the Defendant is deemed to have committed an unfavorable circumstance.

However, in full view of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant recognized the facts of the offense; (b) each victim’s amount of damage was not so significant; (c) the victims were recovered from damage; and (d) the Defendant appears to have been detained for a considerable period of time in the lower court; and (c) the Defendant’s age, character, character, environment, occupation; (d) circumstances and details, means and result leading to the instant offense; (e) circumstances after the commission of the offense; (e) criminal records; (e) family relationship; and (e) economic circumstances; and (e) the Defendant’s punishment imposed by the lower court is deemed unreasonable as it is deemed that the punishment imposed by the Defendant is too unreasonable and excessive. Therefore, the Prosecutor’

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.