A. The lower court’s imprisonment (three months of imprisonment) against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

B. The lower court’s above sentence against the Defendant by the Prosecutor is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. The court below sentenced the above sentence to the defendant on the grounds of sentencing as stated in its holding. The circumstances alleged by the defendant as a reason for sentencing favorable to the trial, such as the fact that the defendant committed the crime of this case, while having the same criminal power as this case 22 times or more, and the defendant did not know about the fact that the defendant committed each of the crimes of this case without fault during the repeated period. The circumstances alleged as a reason for sentencing unfavorable to the trial of the court of the court are seems to have been sufficiently taken into account while determining the sentence in the court of the court below. In our Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and direct principle, there are unique areas of the court of the court of the court of the first instance, and there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the court of the court of the first instance, and that the sentencing of the court of the first instance is relatively small and smoothly agreed with the victims, and the defendant's health condition was not good (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do360, Jul. 23, 2015).

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