All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

An applicant for compensation cannot file an objection against a judgment dismissing an application for compensation pursuant to Article 32(4) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings. Therefore, the part dismissing the application for compensation among the judgment below shall be excluded from the scope of the judgment

2. The defendant asserts that with respect to the punishment (one year and six months of imprisonment) declared by the court below, the prosecutor is too unhued and unreasonable.

3. In a case 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, it is reasonable to respect it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Each of the instant crimes is highly likely to be subject to criticism by committing a crime using a personal trust relationship with the victim, and the victims are obviously suffering from considerable economic and mental shock and pain due to each of the instant crimes, but there is no evidence to prove that the Defendant made a serious effort to pay damages even until the trial is due.

However, considering the fact that the defendant recognized the crime of this case and there is no history of criminal punishment exceeding the fine, and there is no new change in circumstances that could change the sentence of the court below in the trial, and other sentencing conditions such as the defendant's age, occupation, family relationship and living environment, the sentence of the court below cannot be deemed to be appropriate, too heavy or unreasonable.

4. According to the conclusion, the appeal 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.