All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal (public prosecutor) is too unfluent and unreasonable.

2. According to the records of the judgment on the appeal of the defendant, the defendant filed an appeal against the judgment below on December 5, 2016, and on August 24, 2017, the defendant did not submit the reason for appeal within 20 days, which is the period for submitting the statement of reason for appeal prescribed in Article 361-3(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, even after receiving the notice of receipt of the records of trial from the court on August 24, 2017. The petition of appeal does not state the reason for appeal in the petition of appeal, nor does there exist any reasons for ex officio examination even after examining the records. Thus, the defendant's appeal is unlawful (the defendant submitted the statement of reason for appeal on October 26, 2017, and submitted the statement of reason for appeal, but it cannot be a legitimate reason for appeal due to his argument even after the submission of the reason for appeal).

However, the defendant agreed with the victim of the crime of injury, and the victim of the crime of interference with business does not want punishment against the defendant.

In addition, considering the various circumstances that form the conditions for sentencing, such as the age, sex, environment, motive, and consequence, etc. of the Defendants as shown in records and pleadings, the lower court’s punishment is only within the scope of reasonable discretion, and is not recognized to have reached the degree of undueness because it is too low.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is not accepted.

4. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is unlawful, and pursuant to Articles 361-4 (1) and 361-3 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the prosecutor's appeal is without merit, and it is all dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.