All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal argues to the effect that, as the punishment imposed by the lower court (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable, the prosecutor asserts to the effect that the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. We also examine each of the allegation of unfair sentencing by the Defendant and the prosecutor.

The confession and reflect of the defendant, and the fact that the crime was committed once is favorable to the defendant.

On the other hand, each of the crimes of this case committed committed a theft of the victim's property after intrusion upon the victim's residence, which is not good in light of the risk of the crime, and each of the crimes of this case committed again even though the defendant had been punished several times due to the same or similar crimes in the past, and the period of repeated crime is during which such crimes were committed, the defendant did not reach an agreement with the victim up to the trial, and there is no special reason to change the sentencing after the decision of the court below.

Considering the above circumstances and the scope of the recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines of the Supreme Court Sentencing Commission (one year to six years), and other various sentencing conditions as shown in the records and arguments of this case, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the court below cannot be deemed to be too light or unreasonable.

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

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