2. We examine both parties’ assertion of unfair sentencing.

The circumstances are favorable to the defendant, such as the confession and reflect of the defendant, the fact that the defendant returned and agreed to the victim D of the thief crime of this case, the fact that the defendant's health conditions are not good due to military surgery and urology, and the fact that the defendant is in an economically difficult situation as a basic living recipient.

However, in light of the method of crime and the amount of damage, etc., the crime of larceny and unlicensed driving of this case committed by the defendant in intrusion upon the warehouse managed by another person, stolen the stolen goods in the aggregate amount of KRW 15.8 million, and driving them on the cargo vehicle without a driver's license, and in view of the method of crime and the amount of damage, etc., the crime of fraud of this case is not appropriate. In light of the fact that each of the crime of fraud of this case was committed by deceiving four victims, even though the defendant did not have the intent to repay or have the ability to repay, and received the money as a total of KRW 48.5 million from them, and did not reach an agreement with the victims, the case is not easy, and the defendant did not obtain a driver's license at one time, and there was no history of punishment by a fine at least three times in the past, and the defendant's age, character and behavior, and other various circumstances, which are the conditions for sentencing as shown in the argument of this case, the defendant and prosecutor's assertion of unfair sentencing cannot be justified.

3. In conclusion, the appeal filed by the Defendant and the prosecutor is all dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.