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

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

2. The judgment of the defendant shows the attitude of recognizing and opposing each of the crimes of this case. The defendant agreed with the victim E of the crime of interference with the business of this case, and the defendant deposited KRW 1 million with the police officer I as the fiduciary, and KRW 500,000,000 with the Republic of Korea as the fiduciary, in relation to the crime of interference with the performance of official duties of this case. However, it is acknowledged that the crime of this case is not very good in light of the circumstances, method, etc. of each of the crimes of this case. The defendant committed each of the crimes of this case in this case while he was sentenced to a fine in 2013 and was sentenced to a suspended sentence in 2015, even if he committed the crime of interference with the performance of official duties of this case during the suspended sentence period, it is too unreasonable or unreasonable that the court below's punishment exceeded the reasonable discretion, taking into account all the following circumstances: the defendant's age, sex, environment, motive and method of each of the crimes of this case, method and method after the crime.

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. It is so decided as per Disposition.