A. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor (three million won of a fine) is too unhued and unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. We examine both the judgment and the prosecutor’s allegation of unreasonable sentencing.

If there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). The following are the circumstances unfavorable to the Defendant: (a) the Defendant has no record of punishment for the same kind of crime; (b) the Defendant has a substantial amount of damage; and (c) the Defendant committed the instant crime during the suspended execution period; and (d) the Defendant did not pay for damage.

In light of the above circumstances, the lower court did not change circumstances to take into account the sentencing after the sentence of the lower judgment, considering the sentencing of the Defendant.

In full view of the following circumstances, comprehensively taking into account the Defendant’s age, character, conduct, health and financial standing, and all the factors of sentencing as shown in the trial process, such as the record of the instant case and the circumstances before and after the commission of the crime, it cannot be deemed that the sentence imposed by the lower court is excessively

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