All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

2. There is no change in the terms and conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and where the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). It is recognized that: (a) the Defendant confessions all of the instant crimes when the Defendant was in a trial; (b) the Defendant did not have any record of being punished for the same offense; and (c) the instant crime is recognized that the equity between the Defendant and the case of having been tried simultaneously with the crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed Driving) for which the judgment became final

However, while the defendant associates with the victim, there is a high possibility of criticism by actively deceiving his/her own financial power or ability to repay, and the damage was not completely restored to the victim.

The court below set a punishment by comprehensively taking into account the above circumstances, and there is no new change in circumstances that could change the punishment of the court below in the trial.

In addition, when comprehensively considering the sentencing conditions such as the defendant's age, occupation, and environment, and the scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines as shown in the hearing of the court below and the party, the sentence imposed by the court below shall be appropriate, and it shall not be deemed that it is too heavy or unreasonable.

3. Accordingly, the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.