The sentencing (two years of imprisonment) of the lower court is too unreasonable.

The above sentencing of the court below by the public prosecutor is too unfortunate and unfair.

According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court as to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of the facts as to the grounds for appeal, the fact that the Defendant inflicted an injury on the right face of the victim G can be fully recognized.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is just, and there is no error of law as alleged by the defendant.

With respect to each of the unfair sentencing arguments by both parties, the sentencing of the defendant and the prosecutor together are examined as follows.

In light of the circumstances that are favorable to the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant fully acknowledges and reflects the remaining criminal facts except for special injuries, and that the defendant has been punished several times as a fraud, and even during the repeated crime period due to fraud, etc., each of the crimes of this case was committed again, and other circumstances that are the conditions for sentencing specified in the records, such as the motive and background leading up to the crime of this case, the circumstances before and after the crime of this case, the defendant's age, sexual behavior, environment, occupation, family relation, etc., the punishment imposed by the court below cannot be deemed to be too heavy or unreasonable, and thus, each of the unfair sentencing arguments by the defendant and the prosecutor are without merit.

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