2. The crime of this case is deemed to have been involved in the Defendant’s act of using a term “money” in the crime of Bosing highly harmful to society, and there is a need to strictly punish the Defendant with the same deposited money in order to prevent the social harm of the crime of Bosing. However, the lower court seems to have determined the punishment by considering all the above sentencing factors.

In full view of such circumstances, comprehensively taking account of the following: (a) the Defendant led the Defendant to commit a crime; (b) the instant crime was committed in an attempted crime; (c) the victim was returned all the money that the Defendant acquired by deception; and (d) the Defendant was the primary offender who has no record of punishment; and (c) the Defendant’s age, career, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime; and (d) other various sentencing conditions stated in the instant pleadings, such as the circumstances after the crime, etc.,

Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is not accepted.

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.