With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". expenses as “restitution.” [¶ 34.] It is clear that the judgment incorrectly designated the award as restitution to Sully County, rather than as costs of prosecution. There was no request for restitution at- the sentencing hearing — only costs — and Sully County is not á “victim” in this case entitled to restitution. Restitution is defined in SDCL 23A-28-2(4) as “full or partial payment of pecuniary damages to a victim [.] ” (Emphasis added.) SDCL 22 — 1—2(53) defines victim as “any • natural person against whom the defendant in a criminal prosecution has committed or attempted to commit a crime[.]” (Emphasis added.) Under the facts of this case, Sully County is not a victim, entitled to restitution based upon this definition. State v. Ryyth, 2001 S.D. 50, ¶ 10, 626 N.W.2d 290, 292 (<HOLDING>); see also State v. Sprecher, 2000 S.D. 17, ¶¶

A: holding that restitution in the full amount of each victims losses does not exceed the statutory maximum
B: holding that the statutory definition of motor vehicle is not controlling
C: holding that the circuit court did not have the statutory or inherent authority to order restitution in part because the statutes did not envision such an obligation
D: holding county does not fit statutory definition of victim under restitution statutes
D.