A. The sentence imposed by the lower court (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The above sentence declared by the prosecutor by the court below is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. As to each of the unlawful arguments of sentencing by the Defendant and the Prosecutor, it is recognized that the Defendant had been sentenced to a fine through 26 times, suspension of execution, and punishment, and that there was a record of multiple penalties for the same kind of crime, and that the responsibility for each of the crimes of this case has not been somewhat weak in light of the forms and methods of each of the crimes of this case.

However, in consideration of the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of each of the instant crimes, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court is deemed appropriate, and is too heavy or too unreasonable, in light of the following factors: (a) the Defendant’s punishment imposed on the Defendant in the instant argument, such as the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of each of the instant crimes; and (b) the sentence imposed by the Defendant is too unreasonable or too unreasonable.

Therefore, each argument by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that all of the appeals filed by the defendant and the prosecutor are without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition (Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is obvious that "(within the scope of adding up the long-term punishment of the above two crimes) was omitted by mistake" following the "an aggravated punishment for concurrent crimes by applying the applicable provisions of the Act on the Criminal Procedure" (Article 25(1) of the Rules