A. The lower court’s sentencing (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The lower court’s sentencing is too uncomfortable.

2. Where there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared to the judgment of the court below, and the sentencing of the court below is not beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Circumstances asserted by the Defendant and the prosecutor as an element of sentencing were already revealed in the hearing process of the lower court. There is no particular change in circumstances in the sentencing guidelines and the matters subject to the conditions of sentencing after the lower judgment was sentenced.

In full view of the circumstances indicated by the lower court as the grounds for sentencing, comprehensively taking account of the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s sentencing against the Defendant was conducted within the reasonable scope of discretion, and cannot be deemed too heavy or unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant and prosecutor's argument of unfair sentencing is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, since it is without merit.