A. In light of the overall sentencing conditions of the Defendant, the lower court’s imprisonment (one year and two months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. In light of all of the sentencing conditions of the Prosecutor’s instant case, the lower court’s sentence is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. In light of the following factors: (a) the Defendant is living in custody for not less than eight months, and the Defendant seems to have committed the instant crime by suffering from fraud; (b) the Defendant had the same criminal record on the other hand; (c) the Defendant committed the instant crime during the period of repeated crime, although it is related to the instant crime, even though it is related to the instant crime, the amount of damage was not recovered; (d) the amount of damage was not agreed with the victim; and (e) other matters stipulated in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, which are the conditions for sentencing, such as the Defendant’s age, character, conduct and environment, the punishment determined by the lower court is adequate and too heavy or unreasonable.

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.