A. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below (one year and four months of imprisonment) is too unhued and unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. The circumstances favorable to the Defendant include: (a) each of the fraud crimes committed by the Defendant and the victims of the violation of the Child Uniforms Act do not want punishment against the Defendant; (b) the Defendant was involved only in the delivery of the fraud crime through Bosing, and the profits accrued therefrom appears to have been generated therefrom; and (c) the Defendant did not have any particular criminal history other than the records of the two-time suspension of indictment.

However, even if taking into account the degree of Defendant’s participation, the obligation to deliver and receive money directly in the crime of fraud using Bosing is generally an important position. The nature of the crime of fraud in this case is not particularly good, the Defendant’s abuse of violence again to children despite the fact that the Defendant abused his children and transferred them as a child protection case, and other sentencing conditions on the records, such as the Defendant’s age, sexual behavior, environment, circumstances of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, are considered, it is not recognized that the lower court’s punishment is too heavy or unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, since both the prosecutor and the defendant's appeal are 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.