A. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor (one year of imprisonment) is too unhued and unfair.

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

2. The fact that the defendant did not have the same criminal history and is against the judgment is a favorable circumstance.

However, the number of cell phones acquired by the defendant is about 447, and the degree of the defendant's participation in the crime of this case is not somewhat weak, and recently, the acquisition of stolen goods by purchasing smartphones, such as the defendant's crime of this case, is more likely to further promote and cause such crime, which is disadvantageous to the defendant.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of various circumstances, such as the background, means and methods of the instant crime, the circumstances after the instant crime, the Defendant’s age and happiness environment, etc., as indicated in the records and pleadings, the sentence imposed by the lower court is too minor or unreasonable.

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