The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the reasons for appeal (one year of imprisonment, confiscation) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. The court below determined that the crime of this case was committed systematically and systematically, and can be deemed to be very heavy, and that the defendant's participation level is the essential role to complete the crime of this case, although it is merely limited to the withdrawal of the defrauded, it cannot be deemed that the defendant's act of fraud is light, which is an essential role to complete the crime of this case, and such crime type is deemed to have an adverse impact on society, so there is a need to be strict in terms of general prevention of crime. Considering the fact that the number of the crime of this case is majority and the number of damages is not significant, the defendant has no criminal power, and the defendant appears to have caused the crime of this case to be punished for school tuition, etc. as a student, the court below determined the above punishment within the scope of the recommended punishment of the Sentencing Committee of the Supreme Court.

A thorough examination of the reasons for sentencing by the lower court. Further, considering all the factors of sentencing, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, criminal records, background leading to the instant crime, method of commission of the crime, and circumstances before and after the instant crime, the lower court’s punishment cannot be deemed to be adequate and too unreasonable.

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.