A. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (two years of imprisonment, etc.) is too unreasonable.

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

2. The defendant and the prosecutor's arguments are examined together.

There are extenuating circumstances, such as the confession of each of the instant crimes, the fact that the Defendant agreed with the victim O, Q and repaid the amount of damage to the victim I and R in the investigation process and the original trial.

However, the Defendant has been sentenced two times to imprisonment with prison labor for the same crime of fraud and nine times as fines; the Defendant committed each of the instant crimes from the time when the execution of the sentence was not completed due to the fraud to the time when the Defendant was arrested; the Defendant was a criminal act during the repeated crime period; the Defendant did not agree with the Victim C; the Defendant was punished by the Defendant; the Defendant did not appear to have made efforts to recover the damage of the Victim C; the Defendant did not change the circumstances that may be considered in sentencing in the trial; and the Defendant’s age, sexual behavior, environment, family relationship, means and consequence of the crime; and other various circumstances that form the conditions of sentencing as indicated in the instant report and the theory of changes, such as the circumstances after the crime, do not seem to be unfair because the Defendant’s punishment imposed by the lower court is too heavy or unhued.

3. In conclusion, the appeal 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.