A. The punishment sentenced by the court below (the punishment No. 3 and No. 4: imprisonment with prison labor for three months, the sentence No. 1, No. 2 and 5: imprisonment with prison labor for one year and four months) is too unreasonable.

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

2. As to the assertion of unfair sentencing by the Defendant and the prosecutor, the Defendant continued to commit the instant crime even during the period of suspension of execution due to the fraud of similar veterinary laws, and the total amount of damage is an amount equivalent to KRW 99.8 million, and the injury has not been recovered or agreed upon, and multiple criminal records (five times of imprisonment, one time of suspension of the execution of imprisonment, and five times of fine) due to the same criminal act are disadvantageous to the Defendant.

On the other hand, the fact that the defendant led to the confession of all the crimes of this case and reflects the mistake is favorable.

In addition, considering all the conditions of sentencing, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, criminal records, and circumstances after the crime, the lower court’s punishment is too heavy or unreasonable. Thus, each of the above arguments by the Defendant and the prosecutor are 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. It is so decided as per Disposition.