A. The sentence imposed by the lower court (limited to eight months of imprisonment, two years of probation, five million won of fine, one million won of community service, 120 hours of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

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

2. The Korean Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the direct principle, should respect the determination of sentencing in cases where there exists a unique area of the first instance court, and there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the first instance court’s sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion.

(2) The Defendant and the prosecutor’s assertion of unfair sentencing on July 23, 2015 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In light of the following: (a) the Defendant and the prosecutor’s assertion of unfair sentencing, in light of the following: (b) the nature of each of the instant crimes is not good; (c) the Defendant has been subject to criminal punishment twice a sentence; and (d) the Defendant has been subject to criminal punishment on several occasions, such as two occasions a fine; (d) the Defendant is fully recognized and against the instant facts charged; (e) the Defendant has no history of having been punished for the same act of arranging sexual traffic; (e) the Defendant has agreed with the victim of the instant crime; and (e) other conditions of sentencing as indicated in the records and arguments, the Defendant’s personality and conduct, the Defendant’s environment, and family relations, the Defendant’s

3. In conclusion, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is groundless, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.