2. The lower court, based on its stated reasoning, sentenced the Defendant to the above punishment.

The circumstances favorable to the sentencing alleged by the defendant as the grounds for appeal and the circumstances unfavorable to the sentencing alleged by the prosecutor as the grounds for appeal are likely to have been determined by the original court and considered sufficiently.

In full view of such circumstances and various circumstances described in the “decision of sentence” of the lower judgment, and the following factors: (a) the Defendant committed the instant crime without being warneded by an investigative agency even before the instant crime was committed by force several times against the victim B; and (b) the victim’s bereaved families desire to punish the Defendant; and (c) other various conditions of sentencing as indicated in the instant argument, including the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, health status, family relationship, means and consequence of the instant crime; and (d) the sentencing guidelines determined by the Supreme Court’s Sentencing Committee, such as the circumstances after the instant crime, etc., the lower court’s sentencing cannot be deemed to be hot or light beyond the reasonable scope of discretion; and (b) there is no particular change in circumstances in the sentencing conditions in the current trial, and thus, it is reasonable to respect the sentencing of the lower court.

The defendant and prosecutor's assertion are without merit.

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