A. The sentence of the lower court (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared with the lower court’s failure to submit new sentencing data at the trial and the lower court. In full view of the factors revealed in the instant pleadings, the lower court’s sentencing is too heavy or is so unfluent that it exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. The appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor in conclusion is groundless, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.