As to the punishment sentenced by the court below (seven years of imprisonment), the defendant asserts that it is too unreasonable for the defendant, and the prosecutor asserts that it is too uneasible.

There are circumstances that can be considered in light of the circumstances, such as the fact that the defendant repents his mistake, and the degree of the victim's injury is not hot.

However, on the other hand, the defendant was sentenced to a punishment for the same crime and was not less than 2 years after the execution of the sentence was completed, and was planned to commit the crime of this case by preparing excessive measures to report the fact that there was a large amount of money on the victim A, and the method of committing the crime is very dangerous and not only is the victim's fear, but also it seems that the victim has a extreme fear. In full view of all the sentencing conditions including the criminal record, age, family relation, family relation, character and conduct, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, method and method of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, it cannot be deemed that the sentence imposed by the court below to the extent that the punishment was mitigated is too heavy or unreasonable. Thus, the defendant and prosecutor's above assertion are without merit.

3. According to the conclusion, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.