The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The court below rejected an application for compensation filed by the applicant for compensation by the court below, and pursuant to Article 32 (4) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, the applicant for compensation cannot file an objection against the judgment dismissing the application for compensation. Thus, the part dismissing the application for compensation is immediately determined and excluded from the scope of the judgment of this court.

2. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the lower court’s sentence (two years of imprisonment and three years of suspended execution, confiscation) is deemed too uneasy and unreasonable.

3. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court determined the sentence of the lower court in consideration of the following circumstances favorable to the Defendant, taking into account: (a) the nature of the crime of deceiving many unspecified victims in a systematic and planned manner through the role sharing of multiple persons; (b) the fact that there is a serious harm and injury to the victims and society; (c) the Defendant, taking part in the crime of Bosing, forging a public document by participating in the crime of Bosing; and (d) obtained a large amount of KRW 95,40,00 from five victims, taking into account the fact that the Defendant repaid most of the damages to the Defendant, and agreed both with the victims, and that the Defendant led to confession and rebuttal.

There is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the original judgment because new sentencing data have not been submitted at the trial court. In full view of the reasons for sentencing as stated by the lower court and the records of the instant case and the reasons for sentencing as shown in the trial process, the lower court’s sentencing was too unhued and so it exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

It does not appear.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is not accepted.

4. 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 ordered.