2. Where there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared to the judgment of the court below, and the sentencing of the court below is not beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Circumstances asserted by the Defendant and the Prosecutor as an element of sentencing are already revealed in the proceedings of the lower court’s pleadings, or the lower court appears to have sufficiently taken into account in determining the Defendant’s punishment. There is no particular change in circumstances in the sentencing guidelines and the matters subject to the conditions of sentencing after the lower judgment was sentenced.

Considering the circumstances indicated by the lower court on the grounds of sentencing, comprehensively taking into account the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive, means and consequence of the crime, conditions of sentencing as indicated in the instant arguments and records, and the scope of recommended sentences based on the sentencing guidelines, such as the circumstances after the crime was committed, the lower court’s sentencing is too heavy or unreasonable as it was conducted within the reasonable scope of discretion, given that both parties are in the grounds of appeal.

The defendant and prosecutor's assertion are without merit.

3. 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.