The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. In light of the summary of the grounds for appeal in this case’s sentencing conditions, the lower court’s sentence against the Defendant (two years of suspended sentence for one year’s imprisonment) is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. In light of the fact that the Defendant committed the instant crime even though he had been punished for suspension of execution due to the same kind of crime, and the period and scale of the instant crime, etc., the need to punish the Defendant with strict penalty is recognized.

However, in full view of the following: (a) the Defendant recognized all of the instant crimes and reflects his mistake in depth; (b) the Defendant’s health status is not good due to the age of 72 years old; and (c) the Defendant actively endeavored to restore the original state by receiving a letter of opinion promising the transfer of warehouse from the lessee; and (d) the Defendant again made efforts to avoid the same mistake, and (e) the Defendant again made efforts to avoid the same mistake; (b) the equity in sentencing with the same similar incidents, as well as other records and conditions of sentencing, such as the Defendant’s age, family environment, and the circumstances before and after the commission of the crime, it is not recognized that the Defendant’

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.