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 eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence (one year and eight months of imprisonment) of the lower court is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the judgment of 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). The Defendant and the prosecutor’s allegation above are without merit, given that the sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant is deemed appropriate, and is too heavy or unreasonable, given that it is deemed that the sentence imposed by the Defendant is too excessive, or is too unreasonable, given that the sentence imposed by the Defendant is unreasonable, given that the Defendant’s act of larceny is not likely to be committed in a short period, there is no good quality of the crime of larceny, there is a history of having been punished by the same kind of larceny and violence, and that the Defendant did not receive a letter from the victim of special injury. However, in light of the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, motive, means, and consequence of the instant crime, and all of the sentencing conditions

[Public prosecutor asserts that the defendant should be confiscated even as to the articles 2 through 5 of evidence, but since the articles 2 through 5 of evidence 2 are the clothes or transportation cards that the defendant sustained at the time of committing the crime, they cannot be viewed as the articles that have been provided or intended to be provided in the criminal act, and this part of the argument is also without merit.