A. The sentence imposed by the lower court (five months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The above-mentioned sentence of the prosecutor is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. We also examine each of the allegation of unfair sentencing by the defendant and prosecutor.

If there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015, etc.). There is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the lower court on the grounds that the data to newly consider in the trial were not submitted. In full view of the factors of sentencing revealed in the records and arguments in the instant case, the lower court’s sentencing is too heavy or it is difficult to deem that the lower court exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion because it was too heavy or unhued.

Therefore, each of the defendant and prosecutor's arguments on unreasonable sentencing is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.