All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (one hundred months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The above sentence of the court below is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the original judgment in the appellate court and the sentencing of the lower court is not beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). (B)

In light of the above legal principles, this case is examined.

As a mitigated sentencing factor, the circumstances alleged by the prosecutor as an aggravated sentencing factor have already been revealed during the oral argument of the lower court and sufficiently considered, and there is no particular change in circumstances in the matters that are the conditions for sentencing after the sentence of the lower court was pronounced.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the Defendant’s age, career, character and conduct, environment, motive and background of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., and the scope of the recommended sentencing guidelines set by the Supreme Court’s Sentencing Committee on the instant crime, the sentencing of the lower court, which is determined by taking into account all the circumstances unfavorable to the Defendant, within the reasonable scope of discretion, is carried out within the reasonable scope of discretion, and it is not deemed that the sentencing of the lower court is too heavy or unreasonable. Therefore, it is reasonable to respect the sentencing of the lower court.

Therefore, the defendant and prosecutor's argument of unfair sentencing is not accepted.

3. In conclusion, the appeal filed 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.

(However, in accordance with Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, ex officio, add “the comprehensive” to “the selection” following the second 20th of the judgment of the court below pursuant to Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, and revise that the third 2nd “the single crime” is deemed to be a “general crime”.