2. In light of the following, the prosecutor’s assertion that it is necessary to punish the Defendant strictly in consideration of the following: the period, frequency, and scale of each of the instant crimes; and the Defendant’s discovery of each of the instant crimes, which led to the escape of China.

However, in light of the fact that the Defendant voluntarily returned from China to the investigation agency and voluntarily surrenders himself to the investigation agency, and that there is no criminal record that the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor or heavier punishment, and that some of the Defendant’s children need to be supported by the Defendant as yet, and that the Defendant’s children need to be supported by the Defendant, and that the Defendant’s payment of KRW 40 million on April 29, 2014 was made as deposit money in relation to the crime of violating the Customs Duties due to the evasion of customs duties, and that the Defendant deposited KRW 20 million on June 10, 2014, and KRW 10 million on November 5, 2014, respectively, the sentencing of the lower court is difficult to be deemed unfair.

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.