A. The sentence imposed by the lower court (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The above sentence declared by the prosecutor by the court below is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. We examine both the judgment and the prosecutor’s unfair claims for sentencing.

In light of the contents of deception, the lower court seems to have sentenced the Defendant to a punishment by taking into account the following circumstances: (a) the nature of the crime was inferior; (b) the victims are many; (c) the total amount of damage amount is a large amount; (d) the Defendant did not make efforts to recover damage after the commission of the crime; (c) the Defendant committed a criminal offense; and (d) the Defendant committed a false offense; and (d) the Defendant was divided into two parts; and

When comprehensively considering the motive, circumstance, result, the circumstances after the crime, the defendant's age, sexual conduct, record of punishment, etc. in the trial of the political party, as well as the matters under the conditions of sentencing, including the punishment, the judgment of the court below exceeded the reasonable bounds of discretion.

There is no circumstance that it is deemed unfair to maintain the judgment of the court below as it is or that the judgment of the court below is unfair.

Therefore, we cannot accept all the grounds for appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor.

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