All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. The court below rejected the application for compensation of the applicant, and since the applicant cannot file an objection against the judgment dismissing the application for compensation pursuant to Article 32(4) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, the above application for compensation became final and conclusive immediately, the part of the court below's rejection of the above application for compensation in the judgment below is excluded from the scope of the trial

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

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

3. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with 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). Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, the lower court sentenced the above sentence, taking into account the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant repeatedly committed a number of crimes of this case during the period of probation; (b) the Defendant committed a single offense; (c) five times of criminal records; (d) the Defendant was fully aware of the crimes; (c) the Defendant divided his/her mistake; (d) certain victims were recovered; and (e) the violation of the Military Service Act, together with the case where the judgment was rendered; and (e) the circumstances favorable to the Defendant, such as equity

Considering the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, and motive, means, and consequence of each of the instant offenses, including each of the above sentencing factors, in this case where there is no particular change in sentencing conditions compared with the original judgment as the new sentencing materials have not been submitted in the trial, the sentence of the lower court cannot be deemed to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion because it is too appropriate and too heavy or hot.

Therefore, each of the defendant and prosecutor's arguments is without merit.

4. In conclusion, the appeal filed by the Defendant and the prosecutor is with merit.