A. The sentence of the lower court that sentenced one year to imprisonment is too unreasonable in light of the following: (a) the Defendant and his defense counsel (unfair form of punishment) led to confession and reflects the depth of the instant facts charged; (b) the Defendant merely takes charge of cash withdrawal in committing the instant crime; and (c) the Defendant’s home situation is difficult.

B. In light of the fact that the Defendant participated in a systematic and planned Bosing crime and the nature of the crime is very poor, and that the Defendant’s damage was recovered or did not agree with the victim, the above sentence of the lower court is too uneasible.

2. The Defendant’s act of fraud and fraud in each of the instant case committed against an unspecified number of unspecified persons is very poor in its nature, and the role of the Defendant’s act of cash withdrawal taking place in the instant Bophishing crime cannot be deemed to be somewhat weak in the degree of the Defendant’s participation as it is essential to achieve the purpose of the instant crime, the Defendant’s previous criminal records and developments leading to the instant crime, circumstances before and after the instant crime, and other factors specified in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, which are conditions for sentencing, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, etc., as well as the following factors: (a) the Defendant’s act of fraud and fraud in the instant case committed against an unspecified number of unspecified persons; and (b) the role of the Defendant’s act of cash withdrawal taking place in the instant Bophishing crime cannot be deemed to be inappropriate because the Defendant’s participation is too heavy or unjust, considering the circumstances alleged in each of the grounds for appeal. Therefore, each of the above grounds for unfair sentencing are without merit.

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