A. The sentence of the lower court (a year and six months of imprisonment and a fine of KRW 3,00,000) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. The judgment of the court below is advantageous to the fact that the defendant is divided into and against his mistake, that there is a family member to support, that there is an agreement with the victim C and F in the court below, that the above victims do not want punishment for the defendant, that the victim does not want the punishment for the defendant, that each crime of this case is recovered from the altered check, that each crime of this case is in the relation of concurrent crimes after Article 37 of the Criminal Act with the crime of violation of Road Traffic Act (unlicensed Driving) for which the judgment became final and conclusive, and that it is necessary to consider equity with the case where the judgment is to

However, in light of the defendant's criminal law and the amount of damage, the crime of this case is not good, and the defendant has been punished several times by imprisonment for the same kind of crime, and even during the trial, the repeated crime of this case was committed, and the use of check alteration and alteration requires strict punishment due to a crime which causes confusion in the distribution order of securities. The circumstances of the alteration and alteration of check requires strict punishment due to the alteration and alteration of check, and the situation in which S and additional agreements have been made in the trial cannot be viewed as a special circumstance or change of circumstances that can change the sentence of the court below in light of the amount of damage caused by each crime of this case. Considering all the sentencing conditions of this case, such as the defendant's age, sex, environment, circumstance and consequence of the crime of this case, the court below's punishment is too heavy or unfair after the crime of this case was committed. Thus, the defendant and the prosecutor's aforementioned assertion are without merit.

3. In conclusion, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition (Provided, That the judgment of the court below No. 5, No. 19, and No. 6, the "the defendant's legal statement" of No. 4 is "1. The defendant's person.