2. Determination based on the following facts: (a) the crime of this case against multiple victims is highly poor in the nature of the crime; (b) the total amount of damage incurred by the crime of this case is the higher amount; and (c) the fact that many criminal records, including the Defendant was sentenced to a punishment for fraud, are disadvantageous to the Defendant.

On the other hand, the defendant only shared the role of establishing a corporation in the crime of this case and does not seem to have led the crime, and the defendant seems not to have much profits acquired from the crime of this case, and there is a family member to support the defendant, etc. favorable to the defendant.

In full view of the above circumstances and motive leading up to the instant crime, the circumstances after the commission of the instant crime, the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family relation, environment, occupation, etc., as well as all the circumstances that form the conditions for sentencing as shown in the records and arguments, and the degree of punishment of other accomplices, the lower court’s punishment is too uneasible and unreasonable. Therefore, the prosecutor’s aforementioned assertion is without merit.

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.