Defendant

The punishment of the court below (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

Judgment

Based on the statutory penalty, the sentencing is a discretionary judgment that takes into account the conditions of the sentencing prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act within a reasonable and appropriate range.

However, considering the unique area of sentencing of the first instance court that is respected under the principle of trial priority and the principle of directness taken by our Criminal Procedure Act and the nature of the ex post facto review of the appellate court, it is reasonable to reverse the unfair judgment of the first instance court only in cases where it is deemed that the judgment of the first instance court exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion when comprehensively considering the conditions of sentencing in the course of the first instance sentencing review and the sentencing criteria, etc., or where it is deemed unfair to maintain the first instance sentencing as it is in full view of the materials newly discovered in the course of the appellate court’s sentencing review.

In the absence of such exceptional circumstances, it is desirable to respect the sentencing of the first instance court in the absence of such exceptional circumstances.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). Circumstances asserted by the Defendant and the Prosecutor as an element of sentencing in the trial of the lower court were already revealed during the oral proceedings of the lower court, and no changes in circumstances favorable to the sentencing guidelines are found after the sentence of the lower court.

In light of the various conditions of sentencing as shown in the records and pleadings of this case and the reasons for sentencing of the lower judgment, even if considering all the circumstances asserted by the Defendant and the prosecutor as the grounds for appeal, it cannot be concluded that the Defendant’s punishment imposed by the lower court is too heavy or it exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, and thus, is unreasonable.

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

In conclusion, the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is justified.