A. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (7 million won) is too unreasonable.

B. The above sentence declared by the prosecutor by the court below is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Under our criminal litigation law, which takes the principle of court-oriented trials and directness, it is reasonable to respect the determination of sentencing in cases where there exists no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and where the first instance court sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In addition, the court below’s reasoning is that the defendant and the prosecutor’s unfair argument about the sentencing are examined together with the criminal justice of the State and the prosecutor, that the crime is likely to harm the criminal justice function of the State, that the defendant is at risk of being subject to unfair punishment, and that the defendant committed the crime of this case during the period of suspension of execution due to violent crimes, and that the defendant recognized the crime of this case at the court below and reflects the fact that the defendant committed the crime of this case at the court below, that the defendant did not have the same kind of criminal history or imprisonment, that is favorable to the defendant’s age, sex, family relationship, etc., or that changes in the prosecutor’s reasoning.

3. In conclusion, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit. Thus, it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.