사기
All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.
With respect to the punishment sentenced by the court below (ten months of imprisonment), the defendant asserts that the punishment is too unreasonable because the punishment is too unreasonable, and the prosecutor asserts that the punishment is too unfeasible and unfair.
2. We examine both the judgment and the prosecutor’s respective unfair claims for sentencing.
It is reasonable to respect the sentencing of the first instance court in cases where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion. Although the sentence of the first instance court falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, it is desirable to refrain from rendering a sentence that does not differ from the first instance court’s opinion (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015) by destroying the first instance judgment solely on the ground that the sentence of the first instance falls within the scope of discretion, but is somewhat different from the appellate court’s opinion (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court, as stated in the grounds for sentencing, did not change the sentencing conditions of the lower court on the grounds that there is no change in the sentencing conditions of the lower court on the grounds that no new materials were submitted at the trial.
subsection (b) of this section.
Therefore, the defendant and the prosecutor's argument are without merit.
3. In conclusion, since all appeals filed by the defendant and the prosecutor are without merit, they are all dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.