2. The sum of the amount obtained by defraudation of each of the instant frauds exceeds KRW 630,00,000 ( KRW 370,000,000 for the total amount of actual damage).

It is an unfavorable circumstance to the defendant that the victims have agreed with or have not been recovered from the victims.

However, the fact that the Defendant recognized each of the crimes of this case, and that the Defendant did not have any record of criminal punishment, except for the crime of fraud which became final and conclusive after each of the crimes of this case, and that there was no criminal punishment, and that the Defendant should consider equity with the case where the judgment is to be judged simultaneously with the crime of fraud which became final and conclusive, is favorable to the Defendant.

In addition, comprehensively taking into account the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, family relationship, circumstances leading to the Defendant’s crime, means and consequence, and all the conditions of sentencing as shown in the instant records and pleadings, such as the circumstances after the commission of the crime, the sentence imposed by the lower court was adequate and the lower court’s judgment of sentencing exceeded the reasonable bounds of discretion.

There are no circumstances such as evaluation or maintenance of it is deemed unfair (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). Therefore, the prosecutor’s aforementioned assertion is without merit, since the lower court’s punishment is too uneasible and unreasonable.

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.