A. The lower court’s sentence (one year and four months of imprisonment) against the Defendant (unfair sentencing) is too unreasonable.

B. The lower court’s sentence against the prosecutor (unlawful in sentencing) is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. In full view of the favorable circumstances such as the fact that each crime of this case is committed by actively deceiving victims by using trust relationship, and that it is not good to the quality of the crime in light of the method of deception, etc., the victim is a number of victims, the total sum of damages, the damage was not recovered properly, and the defendant has not been agreed with the victims, and the facts of the crime are recognized and contradictory to all of the defendant, and other favorable circumstances, such as the defendant's age, sexual behavior and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., which are conditions for sentencing as shown in the records, such as the defendant's age, sexual behavior and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc., are not too heavy or unreasonable. Thus, each of the arguments by the defendant and the prosecutor are without merit.

3. In conclusion, since the 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.