The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The lower court dismissed each of the prosecutions pertaining to the violation of the Labor Standards Act with respect to workers B and C, the violation of the Labor Standards Act with respect to workers D, and the violation of the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits Act, among the facts charged in the instant case, and convicted the remainder of the facts charged. Only the prosecutor of the lower judgment filed an appeal regarding the guilty portion.

Therefore, the dismissal of public prosecution is separated and finalized as it is and excluded from this Court's judgment.

2. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor for not less than one year and two months of probation, two years of probation, and 80 hours of community service) of the lower court is deemed to be too uneasible and unfair.

3. It is reasonable to respect the sentencing conditions compared to the judgment of the first instance court, if there is no change in the sentencing conditions, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, the lower court, based on the foregoing legal doctrine, determined the sentence by comprehensively taking account of the various circumstances as stated in its reasoning.

The Defendant paid an additional total of KRW 12.5 million to workers in the trial, and there is no new circumstance to increase the sentence of the lower court in the trial following the lower judgment.

In addition, even if considering all the sentencing conditions shown in the pleadings of this case, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, circumstances surrounding the crime, and circumstances after the crime, the sentencing of the court below is too unhued, and it is difficult to view that it exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

The prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

4. The appeal by the prosecutor of the conclusion is groundless, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.