A. The sentence of the lower court (a 3 years of imprisonment, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

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

2. Determination is a factor favorable to the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant recognized all of the instant crimes and reflected therein, and that part of the stolen goods have been recovered to the victim.

Meanwhile, even before committing the instant crime, the Defendant had a history of criminal punishment several times prior to the instant crime, and in particular, even though he/she had been subject to criminal punishment five times due to the instant thief crimes (the two times among them, sentenced to habitual larceny), committed the instant crime at the same time during the period of repeated crimes due to the same kind of crime, and the Defendant committed the instant crime repeatedly in a short period, and the amount of damage is up to 46010,000 won, and the amount of damage was up to 46010,000 won, and was injured by the beer who is a dangerous object of the Defendant, and was unable to recover or reach an agreement on

In full view of the above circumstances and other circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, family relationship, and circumstances after the commission of the crime, the lower court’s punishment is too heavy or is deemed unfair, and thus, the Defendant, his defense counsel, and the prosecutor’s allegation of the above sentencing is not acceptable.

3. In conclusion, since each appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.