2. In light of the judgment, there is only one time of fraud, and the defendant's use of the above investigation document and the crime of uttering and fraud in this case are disadvantageous to the defendant, such as the defendant's use of the forged certificate, etc. of employment in the court below's holding, and the use of it by exercising it to an employee of the victim was not the law of crime acceptance, and the defendant was involved in the acquisition of one cash card, which is a means of access, in collusion with an unspecified person who is a total book for solicitation of passbook collection, although he knew that it would be used for another crime, and the victim of fraud

On the other hand, there are favorable circumstances for the defendant, such as the confession of each of the crimes in this case and the statement that they are divided, the amount of damage caused by fraud is not more than 6 million won, and the defendant seems to have committed each of the crimes in this case for the purpose of preparing living expenses.

In full view of the above circumstances and the defendant's age, character and conduct, intelligence and environment, relationship with the victim, motive and background of each of the crimes in this case, means and consequence, circumstances after the crime, criminal records and family relations, etc., the sentence imposed by the court below is appropriate and it is deemed unfair as it is so unreasonable. Thus, the prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that the appeal by the prosecutor is groundless. It is so decided as per Disposition.