The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the court below (six months of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution) is too unfluened and unfair.

2. The lower court sentenced the Defendant to two years of suspension of execution for six months, taking into account the circumstances unfavorable to the Defendant and favorable to the Defendant.

In full view of the fact that the total sum of wages and retirement allowances which the defendant did not pay to three workers as stated in the judgment of the court below is not a large amount as much as the defendant should sentence heavier than the punishment of the court below, the sentencing judgment of the court below exceeded the reasonable limit of its discretion, in full view of the fact that the judgment of the court below exceeded the reasonable limit of its discretion, and the sentencing criteria, etc.

There is no circumstance that it is deemed unfair to maintain the judgment of the court below as it is or that the judgment of the court below is unfair.

In addition, even if the circumstances and results of the instant crime were to be comprehensively considered, the sentence of the lower court is appropriate, and it is not deemed unfair because it is too unfasible.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

3. The appeal by the prosecutor of the conclusion is without merit and is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

However, the part of the lower judgment’s three to five parallels of “Third, the wage of KRW 5,856,00 and retirement allowance of KRW 13,228,000 for retired workers C” in the three to five parallels of conduct on July 1, 2015 is clear that the wage of KRW 6,110,000 for retired workers D and retirement allowance of KRW 18,000 for retirement allowances and KRW 18,00,000 for retired workers around July 1, 2015 is a clerical error, and thus, ex officio correction is made pursuant to Article 25(1) of the Regulations on Criminal Procedure.