A. The lower court’s sentencing is too inappropriate.

B. The lower court’s sentencing is too uncomfortable.

2. Considering that the nature of the instant crime is not good, and that the Defendant committed the instant crime again during the period of repeated crime even though he had the same criminal record, strict punishment against the Defendant is required.

However, considering the fact that the defendant is divided into his mistake, that the victims do not want the punishment of the defendant by agreement with the victims, and the age, sex and environment of the defendant, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the court below is judged appropriate and is too heavy or unreasonable. Thus, the above argument by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the appeal filed 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 filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition by the court below (Provided, That the judgment of the court below is corrected as it added it in accordance with Article 25(1) of the Regulation on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, and the judgment of the court below on the ground that "1. Aggravation of repeated crimes and Article 35 of the Criminal Act [limited to the proviso of Article 42 of the Criminal Act for the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (limited to the case of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes)] is omitted.