A. The sentence of the lower court (four months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. The crime of this case is a situation unfavorable to the Defendant, in collusion with the Defendant’s name-free loan slabs, by preparing documents necessary to obtain a worker’s full-time loan, such as a false charter contract, certificate of employment, etc., and obtaining a total of 65 million won from the victim, by fraud. In light of the background, method and content of the crime, the amount of damage, etc., the crime is not good, and there is no agreement with the victim or no particular measure to recover from damage, etc.

The fact that the defendant is attempting to commit the crime of this case and is against the defendant, and the nameless loan hubs who are the principal offender planned and prepared to commit the crime of this case, and the defendant acted according to his instructions and does not have relatively much weight in participation and contribution to the whole crime. The economic benefits acquired by the crime of this case are not significant, and there are no records of criminal punishment except for the defendant sentenced to fines twice, and there are no records of criminal punishment for the same crime.

In full view of all the circumstances that are conditions for sentencing, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc., the sentence of the lower court is deemed to be appropriate, too heavy, or is deemed to be unreasonable because it is too unreasonable. Therefore, the Defendant and the prosecutor’s argument are without merit.

3. In conclusion, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, and all of them are dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.