2) The lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.

2. The lower court sentenced the Defendant to four months of imprisonment, taking into account the circumstances unfavorable to the Defendant and favorable to the Defendant.

In full view of the facts constituting the conditions for sentencing in this Court, especially the fact that the Defendant recognized and reflected all of his mistakes, while the Defendant had the power to be punished by a fine by committing the same kind of crime during the period of repeated offense, and the fact that the Defendant committed each of the crimes of this case, and the form of punishment, etc., the judgment of the lower court exceeded the reasonable bounds of its discretion.

There is no circumstance that it is deemed unfair to maintain the judgment of the court below as it is or that the judgment of the court below is unfair.

In addition, considering the circumstances and results of each of the crimes in this case, the sentence of the court below is appropriate, and it is not recognized that the sentence is too weak or unfair because it is too poor, even in light of the circumstances after the crime, the defendant's age, sex, family relationship, etc.

3. The appeal by the conclusion prosecutor and the defendant is without merit, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.