2. We examine both parties’ assertion of unfair sentencing.

The crime of this case was committed by the defendant from April 4, 2008 to January 18, 2013 by forging a diagnosis document and submitting it to the public officials in charge of social welfare at the G community service center at Jin-si in the total amount of 26,793,940 won, living benefits, housing benefits, and medical expense benefits to interfere with the selection of the public officials in charge of social welfare through deceptive means, and acquired the above amount by fraud. On January 31, 2013, although the public officials in charge knew of the forgery of the diagnosis document and attempted to receive the cost of living benefits, housing benefits, and medical expense benefits, but it was not easy to commit the crime because the public officials in charge knew of the forgery of the diagnosis document, and it was not easy to commit the crime, and the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for eight months from May 3, 2007 and completed the repeated crime on March 29, 2008, which was disadvantageous to the defendant after the end of the execution period of the punishment.

On the other hand, the fact that the defendant confessions and reflects, the cost of living benefits, housing benefits, and medical expense benefits acquired by the defendant has been returned, and the fact that the defendant is in the position to support the elderly who is old and high school students, etc. are favorable to the defendant.

In full view of the above circumstances, the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, and other various circumstances that form the conditions of sentencing as shown in the instant pleadings, it cannot be deemed that the sentence imposed by the lower court against the Defendant is heavy or unreasonable, and thus, the Defendant and the prosecutor’s allegation of unfair sentencing is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the appeal filed by the Defendant and the prosecutor is dismissed as all are without merit.