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

B. The sentence sentenced by the prosecutor (five months of imprisonment) is too unhued and unfair.

2. The crime of this case is a situation unfavorable to the defendant that the defendant did not recover damage to the victims, since the defendant sold the shares in advance to the victims and transferred the shares at will without returning the shares in accordance with the terms and conditions entrusted for the sale of the shares, and used the proceeds individually.

On the other hand, the defendant acknowledges all of the crimes of this case and reflects it, and the fact that there is no penalty force exceeding the fine is favorable to the defendant.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and circumstance leading to the instant crime, circumstances before and after the instant crime, etc., the judgment of the lower court’s sentencing cannot be deemed to have exceeded the reasonable bounds of discretion.

In addition, there is no change in circumstances that it is unreasonable to maintain the sentencing of the court below in the trial.

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.