All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) and the defense counsel asserted to the effect that the Defendant had not conspiredd to commit the instant fraud, etc. on the first trial date. However, this cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal due to the assertion raised after the lapse of the period for submission of the grounds for appeal, and even if examined ex officio, in light of the type and content of the Defendant’s participation in, and the amount received by, the Defendant, in the light of the type of the Defendant’s participation in, and the details of the act, and the consideration received by the Defendant,

Therefore, the court below did not err by misapprehending the facts.

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

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

2. The lower court determined that a punishment was determined within a reasonable scope by fully taking into account the circumstances surrounding the sentencing of the Defendant, including the following: (a) the Defendant’s age was the primary offender, (b) there was no conclusive perception of the Defendant’s criminal act; (c) the gain acquired was not much; (d) the total amount of damage was not much; and (e) the damage was not recovered; and (e) there was no circumstance to newly consider the Defendant’s sentence in the trial; and (e) even considering the circumstances asserted by the Defendant and the Prosecutor on the grounds of appeal, the lower court’s punishment is too heavy or unreasonable.

3. As such, the appeal 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.