2. In view of the fact that the Defendant had been punished several times as a crime of fraud, and that the Defendant again went to the instant crime, and that the frequency of the instant crime reaches 27 times and the quality of the crime is not good, it is necessary to strictly punish the Defendant.

However, in full view of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant was detained for about three months in the lower court; (b) the Defendant was detained for more than three months; (c) the Defendant committed the instant crime in depth; (d) the victims have not been punished by the Defendant; and (e) the victims have not yet been convicted of a fine exceeding the age and fine; and (e) other various circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, etc., which are conditions for sentencing as shown in the records and arguments, the lower court’s punishment is too uneasable and unreasonable, and thus, the Prosecutor’s assertion is groundless

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.