A. The punishment of the judgment of the first instance court against the defendant (4 months of imprisonment and 1 year and 2 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

(b) The sentence of the first instance judgment against the Defendant by the Prosecutor is too unhued and unreasonable;

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, the court of first instance appears to have determined the punishment by specifically taking into account the circumstances favorable to the Defendant and the unfavorable circumstances against the Defendant, and there is no fundamental change in the sentencing conditions compared with the first instance court.

In addition, the sentencing of the court of the first instance is too heavy or unreasonable because it goes beyond the reasonable scope of discretion in full view of various circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and background of the offense, means and consequence of the offense, and circumstances after the offense.

3. The appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor are without merit, and all of the appeals are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.