A. The sentence of the lower court (six months of imprisonment, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

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

2. The judgment of the defendant is too excessive to the face of the victim, and the degree of injury of the victim is not minor.

It seems that the mental impulses of the victims were not significant.

This is disadvantageous to the defendant.

On the other hand, the defendant has been imprisoned in depth and reflects his wrongness.

For the victim, 10 million won was deposited and other efforts were made to recover the damage.

Defendant is an initial offender who has no record of criminal punishment.

The children, etc. of the defendant wanted the defendant's preference.

This is the circumstances favorable to the defendant.

In addition, in full view of the following: (a) there is no special circumstance or change of circumstances that may be newly considered in sentencing after the sentence of the lower judgment; (b) the circumstances following the instant crime; (c) the Defendant’s age; and (d) the Defendant’s sexual conduct; and (c) various sentencing conditions as indicated in the instant pleadings, such as the circumstances after the instant crime was committed; and (d) there is no undue or unreasonable ground for the lower court’

3. In conclusion, since the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, all of them are dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition (Article 258-2 of the Criminal Procedure Act applies ex officio pursuant to Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure because it is obvious that the "Article 258-2 of the Criminal Act" in the "Article 258-2 of the Criminal Act is a clerical error in the "Article 258-2(1) of the Criminal Act" in the application of the Rules on Criminal Procedure.