A. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year and seven months of imprisonment, and confiscation) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor (one year and seven months of imprisonment, and confiscation) is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the judgment of 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 (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In determining a sentence against the Defendant, the lower court took into account (i) the fact that (i) a crime of deceiving an unspecified number of victims on a systematic basis is an offense that leads to a crime of deceiving an unspecified number of victims; (ii) the nature of such a crime is not very good; (iii) a serious punishment is required; (iv) the amount of fraud is not large; and (v) the degree of participation

As above, the lower court determined the sentence by comprehensively considering the circumstances favorable to the Defendant and the unfavorable circumstances, and comprehensively taking account of the fact that the Defendant was punished once as a juvenile protection case, and other circumstances that form the conditions for sentencing, such as the Defendant’s age, occupation, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, it cannot be deemed that the lower court’s sentence against the Defendant is too unreasonable as it goes beyond the reasonable scope of its discretion.

There is no special change in circumstances that may change the punishment of the court below in the trial.

Therefore, both the defendant and prosecutor's assertion of unfair sentencing is rejected.

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

However, the court below's "the application of the law" in the judgment below is '1. The applicable law and the choice of punishment'.