The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentencing of the lower court (two years of imprisonment) is deemed to be too unhued and unfair.

2. Determination

A. The lower court: (a) considered various sentencing factors, such as the Defendant’s age and health conditions, and determined a sentence within the scope of the recommended sentence (one year to five years) according to the sentencing guidelines set by the Supreme Court’s sentencing guidelines, taking into account the following factors: (a) there is a significant impact on the crime of telephone financial fraud committed in a planned and systematic manner; (b) there is a need for strict punishment as well as the transport measures that transport the actual amount of deceptive money; (c) the amount of damage caused by the instant crime is relatively large and not recovered from damage; (d) a part of the damage was remitted overseas

B. Although there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the original judgment as the new sentencing materials have not been submitted in the trial court, and considering the various reasons for sentencing revealed in the oral proceedings, the lower court’s sentencing is too unhued and so it does not seem to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

C. Therefore, the prosecutor's argument of unfair sentencing is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.