A. The sentence (4 million won) imposed by the lower court on the Defendant is too unreasonable.

B. The above sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below on the defendant is too unhued and unfair.

2. It is desirable to refrain from rendering a sentence that does not change the conditions of sentencing compared with the judgment of the first instance court, and where the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it. Although the sentence of the first instance falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to refrain from rendering a sentence that does not vary with the judgment of the first instance court on the sole ground that it differs from the opinion of the appellate court although the sentence of the first instance falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In light of the following factors: (a) as new materials for sentencing are not submitted in the trial of the first instance; (b) there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the judgment of the lower court on the ground that the sentencing of the first instance court is too heavy or unfilled, and thus, exceeds the reasonable scope of discretion, taking into

It does not appear.

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