2. The crime of this case was committed by the Defendant by deceiving victims at the Internet trading site of goods, and the nature of the crime was poor, and the Defendant was subject to juvenile protective disposition several times, and the Defendant committed the crime of this case again without any reflection upon the record of being sentenced to suspended execution due to the same crime on March 2016. The crime of this case No. 1 in the judgment of the court below was committed since it was sentenced to suspended execution due to special larceny around November 2016, and it was committed not only several times since it was committed since it was sentenced to suspended execution due to a special larceny, etc.

However, there are favorable circumstances, such as the fact that the defendant led to the crime of this case and reflects his mistake, the amount of damage is not so significant, the victim C returned the money by defraudation to the victim C, the defendant reaches the majority as he is 19 years old, and the crime of Article 1 of the decision of the court below is to be determined in consideration of equity in the case where the judgment is to be rendered simultaneously with a special larceny, etc. which became final and conclusive.

In addition, considering the defendant's age, sex, environment, motive and background of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., all of the sentencing conditions indicated in the records and theories of the crime in this case, the punishment imposed by the court below is too uneasible and it does not seem unfair.

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 prosecutor's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.