All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

A. The sentence of the lower court (along-term two years and six months of imprisonment, short-term two years of imprisonment, etc.) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) The sentence of the lower court’s unreasonable sentencing is unreasonable because it is too unfilled and unreasonable. 2) It is unreasonable for the lower court to exempt the Defendant from the disclosure and notification order, even though there are no special circumstances under which disclosure and notification order should not be disclosed or notified.

Determination on the assertion of unreasonable sentencing by both parties

A. The sentence of unfair sentencing refers to the case where the sentence of the lower judgment is too heavy or too minor in light of the content of the specific case.

Based on the statutory penalty, the sentencing is a discretionary judgment that takes place within a reasonable and appropriate scope by comprehensively taking into account the conditions of the sentencing prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act based on the statutory penalty, and there is a unique area of the first instance court in our Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the direct principle.

In addition to these circumstances and the ex post facto nature of the appellate court, if there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court is not beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). B.

In light of the favorable circumstances of the Defendant, the lower court: (a) the Defendant appears to have committed the instant crime under the influence of the Defendant; (b) the Defendant appears to have caused the instant crime by misunderstanding and impulses with the wrong gender and impulse as a juvenile under the age of 19 at the time of committing the instant crime; and (c) the Defendant did not have any criminal history; and (b) the Defendant appears to have been able to faithfully lead school life prior to committing the instant crime; and (c) under the unfavorable circumstances, ① the Defendant was under the age of 14 years at first her convenience store prior to the convenience store, and was under the age of her daily life.