A. The sentence of the lower court (two months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

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

2. In full view of the circumstances that are favorable to the Defendant, such as the fact that the Defendant committed the instant crime by misunderstanding the victim’s name, thereby contingent the instant crime, the Defendant did not have the same criminal records, and there is no specific criminal records other than once a fine, and the Defendant led to the Defendant to commit the instant crime, which are favorable to the Defendant, including the fact that the Defendant offered convenience to the Defendant and committed the instant crime against the victim with a Vietnam percentage, and that the form of the instant crime is not good, and that the Defendant did not receive a letter from the victim, and that there is no agreement, and that there seems to exist mental suffering from the victim. Considering the sentencing of the Defendant by taking into account all of the factors indicated in the records of the instant case, such as the circumstances leading to the instant crime, the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, criminal act and conditions after the commission of the crime, etc., the Defendant and the prosecutor’s assertion on this is without merit.

3. If so, 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. It is so decided as per Disposition.