A. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (3 million won) is too unreasonable.

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

2. The lower court rendered the said sentence, taking into account the favorable circumstances, such as the Defendant’s perception of the instant crime and reflectiveness, absence of the same criminal records, and the Defendant’s health condition.

In light of the fact that the access media transferred by the defendant can be used for a crime in the future, etc., the nature of the crime is not somewhat unfavorable. The fact that there is no record of punishment for the same crime against the defendant, and that the transfer of this case was only once, etc., consideration should be given to the favorable circumstances. In full view of all the sentencing conditions in the records and arguments including the defendant's age, sex, environment, circumstances leading to the crime, means and consequence, the circumstances after the crime was committed, etc., the sentencing judgment of the court below cannot be deemed unfair or unfair to exceed the reasonable limit of discretion or to maintain them as it is (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). Accordingly, each of the unfair claims for sentencing committed by the defendant and the prosecutor are without merit.

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