The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the part concerning the crime of fraud, fabrication of private documents, and fraud of an above investigation document as indicated in the judgment of the court below: fine of KRW 7 million; and the part concerning the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed driving): fine of KRW 3 million) as indicated in the judgment of the court below is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. The fact that the Defendant had been punished several times due to the same crime before the crime of fraud, fabrication of private documents, and the crime of conspiracy of the above investigation document was committed in the judgment of the court below, and in particular, the Defendant committed this part of the crime during the repeated crime period due to the same crime, etc. is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

However, the following are the circumstances favorable to the defendant: (a) the defendant repents and reflects his mistake; (b) the court below agreed smoothly with the victim of fraud; and (c) the profits acquired by the defendant due to the crime in this part are not significant.

In addition, when comprehensively taking into account all the sentencing conditions and the equity in cases where a judgment is to be rendered simultaneously with a final and conclusive judgment, such as the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, background of the crime, degree of participation in the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too unfeasible and unreasonable.

Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is without merit.

B. In addition, even though the defendant had been punished several times for the same kind of crime, the fact that the non-licenseless driving of this case was committed against the defendant is disadvantageous to the defendant.

On the other hand, when comprehensively considering the circumstances favorable to the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant repents and reflects his mistake, the fact that there is no record of punishment exceeding the fine due to the same kind of crime, and all of the sentencing conditions indicated in the instant case, such as the age, sex, environment, circumstances of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, the sentence of the court below is too uneasible and unfair.

Therefore, this part of the prosecutor's argument is justified.