A. The sentence of the lower court (six months 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 by taking into account the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant’s attempt to commit the instant crime; (b) the Defendant has not been punished for the same type of crime; (c) the Defendant embezzled the victim’s funds several times as the president of the victim’s organization on several occasions; (d) the total amount of the embezzled money was a significant amount; and (e) the fact that the damage was not recovered; and (e) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means, and consequence of the instant crime; and (e) the various sentencing conditions

All the grounds for unfair sentencing asserted by the Defendant and the Prosecutor appear to be the circumstances in which the lower court had already taken full account of the Defendant’s punishment, and there are no circumstances to deem that the above sentencing conditions have changed, and considering the above sentencing conditions, the lower court’s punishment is reasonable within the reasonable scope of discretion.

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.