However, in the course of investigation, the Defendant led to the confession of all the crimes without accusation, and all the persons under suspicion were not actually prosecuted.

In addition, in full view of all favorable circumstances (such as the fact that the defendant suffered from the mental illness of stimulative disorder at the time of committing each of the crimes of this case and the fact that the above disease seems to have an impact on each of the crimes of this case, there is no record of criminal punishment exceeding the fine) and unfavorable circumstances (such as the repetition of accusation against many people, the defendant was arrested due to his inception of the defendant, and there was no risk of criminal punishment by the defendant, and the fact that the victim was aware of the risk of criminal punishment and the state's public authority was waste, etc.), including the age, character, intelligence and intelligence environment of the defendant, motive and means of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentencing judgment of the court below exceeded the reasonable limits of discretion.

There is no circumstance that the assessment or maintenance thereof is deemed unfair (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). Therefore, the lower court’s sentencing is appropriate, and the Defendant and the Prosecutor’s assertion are without merit.

3. In conclusion, since the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.