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

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. The fact that the judgment is recognized as a crime and is against the defendant is favorable to the defendant.

However, each of the crimes of this case committed during the period of repeated crime, in particular, the fact that each of the crimes of this case was committed during the period of repeated crime, without being aware of the fact that it was prosecuted for the 2016 Highest 974 Highest 201, and was committed again without being tried, and that there was a history of criminal punishment of fines

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

Therefore, in full view of all the sentencing conditions of the defendant's age, sexual conduct, health, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, etc., and all the sentencing conditions in the records and theories of the case mentioned above, including the defendant's age, sexual conduct, health, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, the method and consequence of the crime, the circumstance after the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the court below is too heavy or it cannot be deemed unfair, and thus, the defendant and the prosecutor's improper assertion of sentencing 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.