The defendant shall be 600,000 won, which is obtained by deceit, to the applicant for compensation.

A. Defendant 1) The Defendant was physically and mentally weak at the time of committing the instant crime.

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court regarding the assertion of mental and physical weakness, considering the background and process leading up to the Defendant’s crime, the process of the commission thereof, and the Defendant’s behavior before and after the commission of the instant crime, the Defendant was lacking the ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of the instant crime.

does not appear.

Therefore, we cannot accept the defendant's argument of mental and physical weakness.

B. Recognizing the crime of determining the illegality of sentencing, the fact that there is no criminal record for the same kind of offense is favorable.

However, in light of the details and methods of the crime, the frequency of the crime, and the size of the defraudation, the liability for the crime has not been relaxed, the victims have not reached an agreement with the victims, and the victims have made a serious effort to recover the damage.

It is difficult to see that the defendant is disadvantageous to the defendant.

On the other hand, if there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the first instance sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

Therefore, in full view of the defendant's age, sexual conduct, health, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, and all of the sentencing conditions indicated in the records and theories in the above circumstances (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015), the sentence imposed by the court below is too heavy or uneasible and unfair, and thus, the defendant and the prosecutor's improper argument in sentencing is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, and thus, Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act is not applicable.