All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. As to the summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment for a term of two years, three years of suspended sentence, social service hours, confiscation) imposed by the court below, the defendant asserts that it is too unreasonable for the defendant to be too unreasonable, and that the prosecutor is too uneasible and unfair.

2. We also examine the arguments of the Defendant and the Prosecutor.

It is reasonable to respect the sentencing of the first instance court in cases where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, and to refrain from rendering a sentence that does not differ from the first instance court solely on the ground that the sentencing of the first instance court falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, although the sentence of the first instance court falls within the scope of discretion.

(Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In accordance with the foregoing legal doctrine, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the original judgment on the grounds that new materials for sentencing have not been submitted in the relevant trial and the sentencing has not been changed. In full view of all of the reasons for sentencing as stated by the lower court, the lower court’s sentencing is too unreasonable or unhued so that it exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

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 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.