A. The lower court’s sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) The sentencing of the lower court on the grounds that it is unreasonable that the sentencing of the lower court is too uneasible and unfair.2) The lower court’s failure to issue an order to disclose information to the Defendant is unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The relevant legal doctrine on the assertion of unfair sentencing by the Defendant and the prosecutor refers to cases where the sentence of the lower judgment is too heavy or too minor in light of the content of the specific case. The sentencing is based on the statutory penalty, and there is a unique area of the first instance court as to the determination of sentencing under the Korean Criminal Procedure Act, which adopts the trial-oriented principle and the principle of directness. In addition, in light of such circumstances and the ex post facto nature of the appellate court, it is reasonable to respect the first instance court’s sentencing in cases where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the first instance sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). 2), based on the legal doctrine as seen earlier, the instant crime is deemed to have been committed by the victim and the victim, who was friendly from one’s own house to one’s own house, and the victim and the victim, who were suffering from the victim’s emotional distress or the victim.

However, the defendant acknowledges the crime of this case, repents his mistake, and reflects it, and the defendant is subject to criminal punishment.