All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair form of punishment) asserts that the sentencing of the court below (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable, while the prosecutor asserts that the sentencing of the court below is too uneasible and unfair.

However, in light of the fact that the defendant committed many crimes of fraud, theft, assault, and damage to property against the victims who had not been injured during the short period of time, and that there is a history of punishment for larceny and fraud several times, etc., the criminal liability of the defendant is not easy.

However, taking into account the following circumstances: (a) the degree of human and physical damage suffered by the victims is relatively minor; (b) there is no criminal history after 2010; (c) there is no sufficient health due to both sides’ wings and infection; (d) the fact that mistake is recognized and reflects; and (e) all other circumstances constituting the conditions for sentencing specified in the instant case, the lower court’s sentencing cannot be deemed reasonable and too heavy or unreasonable.

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

(However, in the application of the law of the court below, it is clear that "each of the choice of imprisonment" has been omitted at the end of "the pertinent provision of the law and the choice of punishment for the facts of crime". Thus, it is corrected to add it ex officio in accordance with Article 25 (1) of the