The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the lower court (two years of suspended execution in the month of imprisonment with prison labor, two years of probation, and eight hours of community service order) is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and where the sentencing of the first instance 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). It is necessary to take into account the circumstances favorable to the Defendant, such as the fact that the Defendant acquired money under the pretext of investment in the adult amusement room, the fact that the Defendant did not agree with the victim, or the fact that the Defendant repaid or deposited the damaged amount of KRW 54 million out of KRW 70,000,000, which is the damage amount, and that the Defendant recovered a considerable portion of the damage.

In addition, the circumstances alleged by the prosecutor on the grounds of appeal are deemed to have already been considered in the sentencing process of the court below, and there is no new change in circumstances that could change the sentence of the court below in the trial.

When comprehensively considering the conditions of sentencing, such as the defendant's age, sex, environment, etc., as shown in these circumstances, and the deliberation of the original court and the party, and the scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines, the sentence of the original court is not deemed to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion or to be unfair because it is too uneasible.

3. According to the conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition.