All appeals by the Defendants and by the Prosecutor against Defendant A are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Each sentence of the lower court against the Defendants (Defendant A: 7 months of imprisonment, Defendant C: 4 months of imprisonment, 2 years of suspended execution, and observation of protection) is too unreasonable.

B. The lower court’s sentence against Defendant A of the Prosecutor is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In our criminal litigation law, which takes the principle of trial-oriented and directness, there exists a unique area of the first instance court’s determination of sentencing. In addition, in light of the fact that there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to 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 the first instance court’s decision. Although the first instance court’s sentencing falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to refrain from imposing a sentence that does not differ from the first instance court’s opinion (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). (b) The lower court found that the lower court’s unfair argument of sentencing by the Defendant A and the prosecutor had been found to be unfair, taking into account the following factors: (a) there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court’s ex post facto and mental harm inflicted on the Defendant; (b) there is no special circumstance that the lower court sentenced the Defendant to a repeated offense to the extent that the Defendant’s health was altered.

(c)

Defendant

C The defendant has committed a crime with respect to the wrongful argument of sentencing.