The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Although subparagraph 1 (USB 1) which was seized on the summary of the grounds for appeal should be confiscated as being provided for a criminal act, the lower court did not confiscate it. The lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles on unreasonable sentencing.

2. Examining the record of judgment, it cannot be seen that the Defendant used the files seized in the production of the Defendant’s publicity books as indicated in the judgment below, and rather, according to the evidence duly admitted by the court below, only the Defendant transferred the reporter’s “F” publicity books to the printing business, and only the name of the company, etc., of the Defendant was transferred to the printing business.

Therefore, since subparagraph 1 of seized evidence is provided for the criminal acts as stated in the judgment of the court below and cannot be subject to confiscation, the judgment of the court below which did not make a sentence of confiscation is just, and there is no violation of an unreasonable sentencing, such as the prosecutor's assertion.

Therefore, 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.