All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentencing of the lower court (two years of imprisonment) is excessively unreasonable.

B. The lower court’s sentencing of the prosecutor (e.g., indubly unfair) is unreasonable as it is too unhued.

2. The determination of sentencing is based on the statutory penalty, with a discretionary determination that takes place within a reasonable and appropriate scope, taking into account the factors constituting the conditions for sentencing prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, based on which our Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the principle of directness, has a unique area of the first instance trial regarding the

In addition, considering these circumstances and the ex post facto nature of the appellate court, it is reasonable to respect the sentencing conditions in the event that 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, and to refrain from rendering a sentence that does not differ from the first instance court on the sole ground that the sentence of the first instance falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, even though the sentence of the first instance court is somewhat different from the opinion of the appellate court,

(2) The court below’s determination of sentencing is reasonable in full view of the following factors: (a) the Defendant, on July 23, 2015, declared the above sentence to the Defendant on the grounds stated in its reasoning for sentencing; and (b) the Defendant, on the grounds that he/she, led to the instant crime; (c) the Defendant committed the instant crime; and (d) the Defendant committed the instant crime against many victims; and (d) the fact that most of the victims have not been recovered; and (e) the aforementioned factors of sentencing recognized by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below and the court below, which are favorable to the sentencing alleged in the court below; and (e) the court below’s determination of sentencing is reasonable in full view of the aforementioned factors of sentencing recognized by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below.