2. The instant crime was committed by the Defendant by taking part in the Defendant’s delivery of cash to the Bosing Criminal Organization and aiding and abetting the commission of a crime. In light of the method and content of the crime, etc., the nature of the crime is very poor in light of the method and content of the crime. Bosing Criminal is a secret and planned crime, and it is difficult to crack down and prevent the scope of damage, as it is difficult to prevent the crime, and its degree of damage is differentiated and is not easy to recover from damage, and its social harm is very high. Therefore, even if it is a cash delivery, it is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

However, in full view of the following facts: (a) the Defendant recognized the instant crime; (b) the instant crime is an aiding and abetting that requires mitigation of the statutory punishment; (c) the Defendant paid 4 million won to the victim at the lower court and agreed with the victim; (d) the Defendant has no record of criminal punishment in Korea; and (c) other various sentencing conditions specified in the instant records and arguments, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, means and consequence, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., it is not recognized that the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable to the extent that

Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is not accepted.

4. 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.