A. The punishment sentenced by the court below to the defendant (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below against the defendant (eight months of imprisonment) is too unfortunate and unfair.

2. In the judgment of the court, the defendant recognized the crime of this case, and made efforts to recover damage, such as paying for the victims a certain amount of damage and setting up a right to collateral security. The defendant has been punished for the same kind of crime. The defendant committed the crime of this case even though he was a repeated crime due to the violation of the Illegal Check Control Act, the damage amount caused by the crime of this case is not much significant, and the damage was not completely recovered, and the damage was not completely recovered from the victims and it is disadvantageous to the victims.

In addition, in full view of all the circumstances, such as the amount of fraud, character and conduct of the defendant, the environment, the relationship to victims, the motive and means of the crime of this case and the consequences thereof, the circumstances after the crime, etc., the punishment sentenced by the court below against the defendant is deemed appropriate.

Therefore, the defendant and prosecutor's argument of unfair sentencing is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, and all of them are dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.