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. The grounds for appeal by the Defendant and the Prosecutor are also examined.

The defendant received 167,410,000 won from D, the original Cheongsung on January 15, 2015, and had it repaid to the victims who were entitled to preferential repayment (wages creditors) on the basis of the fact that the contact was closed immediately and lived for the escape. Accordingly, the defendant was closed around the time of the flight until he was arrested on January 31, 2017, and the defendant seems to have consumed all the payment of living expenses or personal debt, and the damage has not been completely recovered until then, etc. are disadvantageous to the defendant.

However, prior to the instant case, the Defendant was sentenced to the suspension of indictment twice on the grounds of larceny, etc., which is the first offender who has not been subject to criminal punishment before the instant case.

The fact that the defendant recognizes his mistake and reflects his mistake is favorable to the defendant.

In full view of the above favorable circumstances, unfavorable circumstances, and the scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines of the Supreme Court Sentencing Commission (in the area of increase: August through January 6), and other circumstances that are the conditions for sentencing as shown in the pleadings, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, and circumstances before and after the crime, the lower court’s punishment is too heavy or unbrupted, and thus, the Defendant and the prosecutor’s assertion are without merit.

3. In conclusion, since the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, all of them are dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.