A. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The above-mentioned sentence of the prosecutor is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and where the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect the sentencing of the first instance as an appellate court (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The instant case is a fraud case involving a total of 33 damaged persons on the Internet transaction, and the nature of the relevant crime is inferior, and the damage was not recovered.

It reaches KRW 31,351,500 in total.

On the other hand, the defendant recognizes crimes.

As a youth of 20 years of age, the accused has no record of crime exceeding a fine.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of various conditions of sentencing, such as Defendant’s age, health status, environment, family relationship, circumstances after the commission of the crime, and the consequences thereof, and there are no special circumstances or changes in circumstances that may change the sentencing of the lower court after the commission of the crime, the sentence imposed by the lower court cannot be deemed to be too heavy or unfair because it goes beyond an appropriate and reasonable scope of discretion.

The argument that the sentencing of the defendant and the prosecutor is unfair is without merit.

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