A. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below (in 10 months of imprisonment, confiscation, and collection) is too unhued and unfair.

B. The sentence imposed by the Defendant by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. In light of the fact that: (a) the judgment prosecutor and the Defendant’s respective unfair arguments in sentencing together with each other; (b) the Defendant had been punished several times for the same kind of crime; and (c) the Defendant appears to have committed an act that may lead to the commission of the crime, such as administering a crypte and sending a text message that leads to a failure or threat to the crypte, etc., the Defendant should be punished against the Defendant.

However, in full view of the following circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, family relationship, motive and background, means and consequence of the instant crime, and the circumstances after the commission of the crime, the Defendant’s punishment imposed by the lower court exceeded the reasonable bounds of discretion, and the lower court’s determination of sentencing exceeded the reasonable bounds of discretion.

There are no circumstances such as evaluation or maintenance of it is deemed unfair.

Therefore, as the prosecutor asserts that the sentence imposed by the court below is too uneasible or unreasonable, or it cannot be deemed unfair because it is too unreasonable as the defendant asserts, so the prosecutor's and the defendant's above assertion are without merit.

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