A. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment, and confiscation) is too unreasonable.

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

2. We also examine the judgment and prosecutor’s arguments.

The circumstances favorable to the defendant include the fact that the defendant recognized the crime of this case, the defendant's role in the cash collection book was not led to the overall crime of this case, the defendant was partially distributed criminal proceeds from the crime of this case, and the defendant did not have any record of criminal punishment in the Republic of Korea.

On the other hand, the crime of this case committed by the accomplice of the defendant assumes the investigator of the prosecutor's office, causing the elderly victim D to take cash KRW 50 million next to the laundry of the house, and the crime of this case was committed with the above money by intrusion upon the above victim's residence, and the nature of the crime is not very good. The crime of this case is highly harmful to society, the crime of this case is committed systematically, planned, and intelligently, and even if the subordinate member who participated only in the part of the crime is unable to arrest the whole organization, it is necessary to severely punish the crime; the defendant received instructions related to the crime of this case from the accomplice in China before the defendant enters Korea; and the defendant did not recover from the damage properly caused to the victim.

Considering such overall circumstances and the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, etc., the lower court’s sentencing cannot be deemed to be too weak or unreasonable.

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