All appeals filed by prosecutors and defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence of the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. The determination of sentencing is based on statutory penalty, and the discretionary determination is made within a reasonable and reasonable scope, taking into account the factors constituting the conditions for sentencing prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act.

However, considering the unique area of sentencing of sentencing of the first instance that is respected under the principle of trial priority and the principle of direct jurisdiction taken by our criminal litigation law and the nature of the ex post facto review of the appellate court, the sentencing of sentencing of the first instance was exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion when comprehensively taking into account the factors and guidelines for sentencing specified in the first instance sentencing trial process.

In light of the records newly discovered in the course of the appellate court’s sentencing hearing, it is reasonable to file an unfair judgment of the first instance court, only in cases where it is deemed unfair to maintain the sentencing of the first instance court as it is for the court to judge the sentencing of the first instance court.

Unless there exist such exceptional circumstances, it is desirable to respect the first instance sentencing determination (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In most cases, the circumstances alleged by the prosecutor and the Defendant as the elements for sentencing were revealed in the hearing of the lower court, and there is no particular change in circumstances related to the matters subject to sentencing after the sentence of the lower judgment.

In addition, the sentencing of the court below is too somewhat somewhat less or less than reasonable scope by taking into account the reasons for the sentencing as stated by the court below and the various conditions for the sentencing as shown in the records and theories of change, such as the defendant's age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, etc.

Therefore, the prosecutor and the defendant's assertion are without merit.

3. If so, the appeal by the prosecutor and the defendant is reasonable.