The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. In view of the fact that the gist of the grounds for appeal is a large amount of damage and that a substantial damage is not recovered, the lower court’s imprisonment (three years of suspended sentence for imprisonment with labor for a period of two years) is deemed unreasonable.

2. In light of the fact that the defendant obtained a loan from the victim's new bank on March 29, 201 in order to repay his/her obligation for the export bill of exchange and established a right to collateral on his/her own real estate, the damage of the victim's new bank can be evaluated as having been restored to a substantial part (Seoul High Court Decision 2012Na68370 Decided June 26, 2013 also determined that it is difficult to view that the defendant's obligation for the export bill of exchange was converted to the above new loan obligation or that the repayment period was postponed), the defendant's new bank was paid dividends of KRW 1,273,470,785 to the part of the real estate provided as security, the cargo stated in the bill of lading except for the bill of lading as of April 29, 201, and the remaining cargo was shipped back later, and the defendant did not suffer from considerable harm to the defendant, including the defendant's new motive for committing the crime of exchange in consideration of the following circumstances.