The appeal by the prosecutor is dismissed.

1. In light of the substance of the grounds for appeal in this case’s business size, business period, criminal records of the accused, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court (ten months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, three million won of fine, three million won of penalty, five million won of penalty) is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. The Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the direct principle, ought to respect the determination of sentencing in cases where there exists a unique area of the first instance court, and there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). There is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the original judgment as the new sentencing materials have not been submitted at the trial court. In full view of all the reasons for sentencing indicated in the record of the instant case, the lower court’s sentencing is too low and so it cannot be deemed that the lower court exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

The prosecutor's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

3. The final appeal is dismissed.