The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence of the court below (two years of suspended sentence in October) to the summary of the reasons for appeal is deemed to be undue.

2. In light of the fact that the total amount of the judgment obtained by the defendant is not more than 60 million won, the victims did not reach an agreement and do not actually recover from damage, and the act of invalidation of indication of official duties of this case also undermines the function of the State's compulsory disposition by impairing the effectiveness of seizure indication, and the nature of the crime is not good, the defendant's liability is not less than the punishment of the defendant. However, as stated in detail at the court below, the defendant exported the seized object under the premise that it is the best method to repay debts accumulated in the situation where the defendant faces managerial difficulties due to the rapid decline in the international exchange rate at the time and to continue his business, and further, it appears that the defendant committed the crime by willful negligence after being supplied goods from the victims for the production of the product, and that the defendant did not have any circumstances to take into account the circumstances. The defendant's assertion that the defendant's act of invalidation of indication of utility at the time of seizure is less than the total appraised value at the time of the seizure indication of the object, and there is no motive and reason to punish the punishment of this case.

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.