2. Each of the instant crimes committed by the Defendant is an unfavorable circumstance against the Defendant, for instance, by forging and using two copies of the test report under the name of the head of the U.S. regional small and medium enterprise headquarters in order to supply the Navy headquarters at the company where the Defendant works as the head of the business department.

However, in full view of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant’s primary crime recognized each of the instant crimes as a primary crime; (b) the Defendant’s shape booms, etc. that forged the written test result; and (c) there were no problems such as deterioration of performance, etc. in the shape booms, etc. that were actually supplied by the Defendant; and (d) there were no illegal gains acquired by the Defendant from each of the instant crimes; and (e) other circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, criminal conduct, home environment, motive and circumstance of each of the instant crimes; and (e) the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court is too weak.

shall not be deemed to exist.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition.