2. The court below's punishment is reasonable in full view of all the above sentencing factors in light of the following factors: (a) the size of defraudation by the crime of this case is not small; (b) the substantial damage still remains without recovering from the trial; (c) the defendant committed the crime of this case during the period of suspension of execution; (d) the defendant committed the crime of this case in good faith during the trial process of the court below; (e) the part of damage was recovered; (e) the financial condition of the defendant operated by the defendant has deteriorated; and (e) the fact that the defendant committed the crime of this case would have been likely to cause the crime of this case; and (e) the defendant reflects the crime of this case.

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

(However, according to Article 25 of the Regulations on Criminal Procedure, the Prosecutor’s partial revision of the facts charged at the trial to “No. 30 November 30, 2010” in Part 15 of the facts charged of the lower judgment ex officio pursuant to Article 25 of the Regulations on Criminal Procedure.