A. The sentence of the lower court (ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

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

2. The lower court rendered a sentence by taking account of the contents and methods of each of the instant crimes, the frequency of the crimes, and the fact that the damage was not recovered due to each of the instant crimes, and other unfavorable circumstances, such as the Defendant’s character and behavior, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crimes, the circumstances after the crimes, etc., were considered as having been committed, taking into account the following factors: (a) the degree of damage caused by each of the instant crimes was not significant; (b) the Defendant’s age was lower; and (c) the Defendant’s career was nonexistent; and (d

The grounds for unfair sentencing alleged by the Defendant and the prosecutor seem to be the circumstances in which the lower court has already taken full account of the Defendant’s punishment.

The court below determined the punishment within a reasonable scope by taking into account the circumstances favorable to the defendant with respect to the sentencing of this case, and there are no circumstances to deem that the above conditions of sentencing have changed in the appellate court.

Therefore, the Defendant and the prosecutor’s assertion cannot be accepted, since the lower court’s punishment is heavy or light.

3. As such, the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.