The sentence of the court below (two years of suspended sentence in eight months of imprisonment) is too unhued and unfair.

Judgment

The crime of this case is committed by the Defendant in collusion with E and D by deceiving the victim and deceiving the victim, and the Defendant’s criminal liability is not less than that of the crime in light of the degree of participation in the crime, such as preventing the victim from confirming the copy of the register before entering into the contract, receiving and using the 30 million won out of the actual lease deposit acquired by deception, etc., and failing to agree with the victim, and the Defendant committed the crime of this case even though he had the record of being sentenced to a fine or a suspended sentence of imprisonment on several occasions for the same crime.

However, in full view of the following factors: (a) the Defendant committed the instant crime when it was in the trial; (b) the Defendant partially recovered the damage by paying the victim money exceeding KRW 30 million; and (c) all the sentencing conditions, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and background of the crime; and (d) circumstances after the crime; and (b) the scope of the recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines set by the Supreme Court Sentencing Committee, fraud, general fraud, type 1 (less than KRW 100 million); (c) the decision of the recommended area (basic area); and (d) the scope of the recommended sentence (six to one year and six months), etc., it is not recognized that the sentence of the lower court is too unreasonable.

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 groundless. It is so decided as per Disposition.