밀항단속법위반등
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the lower court’s sentence (one year and six months of imprisonment, three years of suspended execution, observation of protection, and community service order 120 hours) is too minor.
2. In full view of all the conditions of the arguments and the sentencing specified in the records of the case, including the circumstances unfavorable to the judgment of the court below (the purpose of the crime of violation of the Act on Control of Smuggling was to collect money from a person who will be pushed ahead of Korea in Japan, the fact that the purpose of the crime of violation of the Act on Control of Smuggling was to collect money from a person who will be pushed ahead of Korea in Japan, there were many criminal convictions of the same kind in the case of special larceny crimes, and there are no serious efforts to recover damage) and favorable circumstances (in the case of the crime of violation of the Act on Control of Smuggling, the fact that the crime of violation of the Act is not the principal offender).
There is no circumstance that the assessment or maintenance thereof is deemed unfair (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). Therefore, the lower court’s sentencing is appropriate, and the prosecutor’s assertion is without merit.
3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.