The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence of the court below (two years of imprisonment, three years of suspended execution) is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the judgment of the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). It is difficult to readily conclude that the degree of participation of multiple victims is somewhat weak due to the occurrence of multiple times of receiving investment funds using a multi-level similar organization, and the Defendant’s criminal period is long and the amount received is small and the amount received is not small.

However, in light of all kinds of sentencing conditions indicated in the pleadings of this case, including the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime of this case, circumstance after the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the court below is deemed to be too unjustifiable and thus, the defendant is deemed to have suffered a considerable loss of investment together with his family members, and the defendant was not prosecuted due to fraud, equity with the sentencing, and special circumstances to change the sentencing after the judgment of the court below cannot be found. The prosecutor's above 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.