A. In light of the fact that the crime of this case by the prosecutor was not committed, the punishment sentenced by the court below (one year and three months of imprisonment, additional collection of 100,000,000) is too uneased and unreasonable.

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

2. We also examine the judgment and the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing.

The fact that the defendant's mistake is recognized and seriously reflected, that the defendant has served as a public official for a long time until the transfer of this case, and that the surrounding persons, such as the defendant's work bonus, wanting to take a preference against the defendant, are favorable to the defendant.

On the other hand, the crime of this case is a normal situation that is unfavorable to the defendant, even if considering the issue of the method and practice of the government-funded construction tender, the most responsible for illegal practices such as this case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case

In full view of the above-mentioned normal relationship, the age, character and conduct, environment, etc. of the defendant and the various circumstances shown in the arguments, since the sentence imposed by the court below against the defendant cannot be deemed to be too weak or unreasonable, each of the grounds for unfair sentencing by the prosecutor and the defendant are without merit.

3. In conclusion, the appeal by the prosecutor and the defendant is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that all of the appeal by the prosecutor and the defendant are without merit. It is