The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the lower court’s punishment (one year and six months of imprisonment) is deemed to be too unhued and unfair.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and where the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015, etc.). The number of crimes committed by the Defendant reaches at least 50 times, the sum of the amount of theft and fraud exceeds 30 million won, but most of the damages have not been recovered, etc. are disadvantageous circumstances.

However, it is favorable for the defendant to recognize the crime of this case and reflect it, and the defendant is the first offender who has no record of criminal punishment prior to this case.

The court below determined punishment in consideration of all the above circumstances, and there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the court below because new sentencing data unfavorable to the defendant have not been submitted in the court below.

In addition, comprehensively considering the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, circumstances after the crime and equity in punishment with J, which is an accomplice to some of the crimes (a two-year suspended sentence of imprisonment, a three-year period of probation, community service 200 hours, confiscation) etc., the lower court’s sentencing is deemed appropriate, and the lower court’s sentencing is deemed unreasonable as it goes beyond the reasonable scope of discretion.

We do not accept the prosecutor's improper argument of sentencing.

3. The prosecutor’s appeal of conclusion is without merit and is dismissed pursuant to Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act (Provided, That pursuant to Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, the prosecutor of the lower judgment’s judgment ex officio and ex officio pursuant to Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, and the prosecutor who instituted a public prosecution in the column of “public prosecutor’s judgment’s