All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. On the summary of the reasons for appeal, the defendant asserts that the defendant is too unfasible to the sentence of the court below (two years and six months of imprisonment), and that the prosecutor is too unfasible and unfair.

2. A criminal litigation law that takes the principle of court-oriented trials and the principle of direct determination has a unique area for the determination of sentencing in the first instance court, and there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and where the first instance court’s sentencing 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). There is no significant change in the terms of sentencing compared to the lower court’s judgment even if the materials submitted in the trial were presented at the trial court, and in full view of all the various circumstances that form the conditions of sentencing as indicated in the records and the theory of changes in the instant case, the lower court’s sentencing was too heavy or it exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion by putting

shall not be deemed to exist.

Therefore, the argument that the sentencing of the defendant and the prosecutor is unfair is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit. Thus, the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.