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

B. The above-mentioned sentence of the prosecutor is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. The circumstances are favorable to the fact that the Defendant recognized the instant crime and reflected the instant crime, the Defendant did not have criminal records exceeding the same kind or fine, the fact that the Defendant was actually promoting the purchase of set, and that the efforts to correct the violation of the Mountainous Districts Management Act were made in the event of the violation.

However, there are extenuating circumstances such as the fact that the defrauded amount is considerably large of KRW 400 million, the failure to recover damage to the trial court, and the amount of unauthorized collection of earth and rocks is considerable. Such sentencing factors are considered in the process of determining the punishment by the lower court, and it is difficult to evaluate that there exists a change in the sentencing conditions compared with the lower

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the factors revealed in the proceedings of the instant case, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, background of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, the sentencing of the lower court is too heavy or unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant and prosecutor's argument are without merit.

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