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

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unfair.

2. We also examine the judgment prosecutor and the defendant's respective arguments relating to sentencing.

In addition, the Defendant committed each of the instant crimes under the influence of alcohol without being subject to suspension of execution due to the same kind of crime, and the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol treatment at the hospital.

However, the fact that a person continues to commit the instant crime even after he/she was investigated by an investigative agency after taking out from time to time and drinking, etc. is disadvantageous.

However, the fact that the defendant was committed each of the crimes in this case, the fact that the victim of property damage, the victim of special intimidation, and the victim were not punished by the defendant is favorable.

In addition, in full view of the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, family relationship, motive, background, means and consequence of the crime, and all the conditions of sentencing as shown in the instant records and arguments, such as the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court is appropriate and the sentencing judgment by the lower court exceeded the reasonable bounds of its 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 the defendant's assertion is too unreasonable as the defendant asserts, so the prosecutor and the defendant's 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.