All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unfair.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and where the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). While the Defendant is aware of a crime, the Defendant is against the recognition of the crime, but the Defendant has a number of records of criminal punishment for the same kind of crime, and this case is a crime during the same repeated offense period.

There are no new circumstances to consider sentencing after the sentence of the lower judgment is rendered.

In addition, in full view of all the sentencing conditions in the records and pleadings, such as the defendant's age, health, sex, environment, motive for committing a crime, means, and consequence, the sentence imposed by the court below is deemed appropriate, and it cannot be deemed that the sentence imposed by the defendant is too heavy or unreasonable.

Therefore, each of the unfair sentencing arguments of the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit.

3. The conclusion is that the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, and it is dismissed pursuant to Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition (Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. However, since it is obvious that the "60,00 won" (Article 1 of the judgment below) in the disposition of the court below is a clerical error of "60,000 won," it is obvious that it is a clerical error of "60,000 won," it is corrected ex officio pursuant to Article 25(1)