A. The sentence of the lower court (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. The judgment is based on the records that the defendant had been punished several times for the violation of the Road Traffic Act and the violation of the Road Traffic Act (non-licensed driving). The defendant again committed each of the crimes of this case without being aware of the fact that he committed the crime of this case without being aware of the fact that he committed the crime of this case even though he was under the period of suspension of execution due to the violation of the Road Traffic Act, but was disadvantageous to the defendant, or that he disposed of the vehicle of this case when the defendant's family and branch members reflect his mistake, and that the defendant's family and branch members want the defendant's wife, and other factors of sentencing as shown in the arguments, such as the defendant's age, health, character and behavior, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc., the sentence of the court below does not seem to be too heavy or unreasonable. Thus, each of the above arguments by the defendant and prosecutor

3. In conclusion, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor 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.