A. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below on the defendant (ten months of imprisonment) is too unhued and unfair.

2. It is recognized that the judgment of the defendant led to the confession of the crime and reflects the mistake in depth, and that the cash card which the defendant kept at the time of the crime was only two.

However, since the crime of violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act is likely to cause other property crimes and its social harm is high, it is required to impose severe punishment.

On July 21, 2016, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act at the Busan District Court on July 21, 2016, and the execution of imprisonment with prison labor is completed, and the Defendant committed the instant crime again (the period of repeated crime) for a period of four months.

The accused has two different types of criminal records, which have been punished by imprisonment and other penalty.

In full view of the above circumstances and other circumstances, the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, family relationship, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment cannot be deemed to be too weak or unreasonable.

Therefore, each argument by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit.

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