The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. In light of the following: (a) the degree of damage suffered by the victims is not somewhat weak; and (b) the victim C still wishes to punish the Defendant, the lower court’s punishment (two years of suspended sentence for six months of imprisonment) is deemed unreasonable.

2. The fact that money and valuables are obtained through the use of the judgment forged lease contract and that there is no agreement with the victim C is a reason for sentencing disadvantageous to the defendant.

However, in full view of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant fully recognized each of the instant offenses; (b) there is no particular criminal history except the punishment imposed by a fine due to the violation of the Food Sanitation Act; (c) the Defendant agreed with the victim D, and the Defendant paid some of the goods to the victim C, and then did not pay the remainder of the goods in the cash color; and (d) other circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, the motive, background, means, and consequence of the instant offense; and (e) the circumstances after the commission of the offense, etc., which are conditions for sentencing as indicated in the instant records and pleadings, cannot be deemed that the sentence imposed by the lower court is too harsh.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

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.