All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. The defendant asserts that the reasons for appeal are too unreasonable because of the punishment sentenced by the court below (eight months of imprisonment), and the prosecutor asserts that it is too unfasible and unfair.

2. The crime of this case was committed by threatening a minor victim to withdraw money and valuables. It is not good that the defendant had been punished for the same criminal record, and the defendant committed the crime of this case without being aware of the fact that he was committed during the repeated crime due to the crime of this case, and that he did not agree with, or did not receive a letter of suspicion, is an unfavorable condition to the defendant.

On the other hand, however, the defendant recognized the crime of this case and provided the cause of damage by participating in the theft crime on the premise that the crime of this case was committed and did not actually acquire the money, and that the victims may punish money when they stolen the article.

The fact that it appears is favorable to the defendant.

In full view of the above circumstances as well as whether the sentencing criteria under Article 51 of the Criminal Act, which appears in the records and arguments of this case, are applicable to crimes: In light of the fact that there are no special changes in circumstances that the sentencing criteria are different from the original judgment and the punishment, the lower court’s punishment is too heavy or unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, each appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.