All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. As to the summary of the grounds for appeal (in both cases, one year and two months of imprisonment, etc.), the defendant asserts that the punishment is too unreasonable, and that the prosecutor is too uneasible and unfair.

2. It is reasonable to respect the sentencing conditions compared to the judgment of the first instance court, if there is no change in the sentencing conditions, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, the lower court, based on the foregoing legal doctrine, determined the sentence by comprehensively taking account of the various circumstances as stated in its reasoning.

The judgment below

Since then, there is no new circumstance that can change the sentence of the court below in the trial court.

In light of the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, method of crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentencing of the lower court is too heavy or it is deemed that the lower court exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, as it is too heavy, in light of the following factors: (a) the number of shootings in the instant case is high; (b) the room to be specially protected; and (c) there are many crimes committed in the same space as toilets; and (d) the Defendant’s age

Defendant

The prosecutor's assertion and prosecutor's assertion are without merit.

3. The appeal filed by the Defendant and the prosecutor in conclusion is groundless, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.