All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on Defendant 1) even though the Defendant was physically and mentally deprived or physically weak at the time of committing the instant crime.

2) The lower court’s sentence (a year of imprisonment, confiscation) against an unjust defendant is too unreasonable.

B. The lower court’s sentence against the Defendant by the Prosecutor is too uncomfortable.

2. Judgment on the grounds for appeal

A. According to the records of misapprehension of the legal principles, the Defendant appears to have been receiving medical treatment due to depression at the time of the instant crime.

However, in full view of all the circumstances, such as the situation at the time of the instant crime, the Defendant’s act before and after the instant crime, which was duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 103, 104, supra; Supreme Court Decision 103Do104, Apr. 1, 201).

It does not seem that it does not appear.

Therefore, the defendant's mental disorder is without merit.

B. The unfair sentencing of the sentencing is based on the statutory penalty, and the discretionary determination is made within a reasonable and reasonable scope, taking into account the factors constituting the conditions for the sentencing as prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, based on which our criminal litigation law adopts the trial-oriented principle and the principle of directness, has a unique area for the first deliberation of the sentencing determination.

In addition, in light of such circumstances as well as the ex post facto aesthetic nature of the appellate court, if there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the first instance judgment does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, Defendant and the prosecutor, respectively.