A. The sentence of the lower court (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

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

2. The lower court rendered a sentence, taking into account the following circumstances: (a) most of the Defendant’s most time to commit a crime; (b) the Defendant committed the instant crime during the period of repeated crime; (c) the Defendant had been punished several times during the same kind of crimes; and (d) the fact that part of the damage has not been recovered was disadvantageously taken into account; and (c) other factors of sentencing as indicated in the instant records and arguments, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime; and (d) the circumstances after the crime.

Even when considering the circumstances alleged as the grounds for appeal by the Defendant and the Prosecutor, the lower court seems to have determined the punishment within a reasonable scope, sufficiently taking into account all the circumstances regarding sentencing.

Therefore, the defendant and prosecutor's argument are without merit.

3. 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.