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

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. The crime of this case in which the defendant, as a member of the telephone financial company's organization, takes charge of the so-called delivery of the defendant's cash from the victim and delivered it to other trillion staff, is not less severe, but the defendant received education as to the method of crime from a member of the telephone financial fraud commission in China, and the defendant was punished five times by a fine due to fraud. However, although the defendant was convicted of a criminal act, the defendant was committed at the time of committing the crime, was divided, was committed against his father who is not healthy, and was supported by his father who is not healthy, and all the kinds of sentencing conditions shown in the argument of this case, such as the defendant's age, sexual behavior, environment, etc., it cannot be said that the sentence of the court below is too heavy or unreasonable.

3. Accordingly, the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.