All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence of the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

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

2. The Korean Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the direct principle, should respect the determination of sentencing in cases where there exists a unique area of the first instance court, and there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the first instance court’s sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion.

(Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). The fact that the Defendant has recognized all of the instant crimes and took an attitude against the Defendant, etc. is favorable to the Defendant.

However, in light of the circumstances leading up to the instant crime, the applicable law, the number of victims, and the amount of damages, etc., the victims, most of which are small self-employed, appear to have suffered considerable economic and mental pain, and have not been recovered until now, are disadvantageous to the Defendant.

In full view of each of the above circumstances, comprehensively taking account of the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and background of the instant crime, means and method of the instant crime, and all of the sentencing factors expressed in the process of trial and records, such as the circumstances after the crime was committed, the sentence imposed by the lower court is beyond the scope of reasonable discretion, or is too heavy or unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is groundless, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition

[1. However, in the application of the law of the court below, it is clear that the "1. rejection of an application for compensation order: Article 32 (1) 3 and Article 25 (3) 3 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings" has been omitted by mistake, and therefore, it is corrected to add it ex officio in accordance with Article 2