All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the lower court’s punishment (one year of imprisonment) is too heavy or (one year of imprisonment) it is too heavy.

2. We examine both the judgment and the prosecutor’s respective unfair claims for sentencing.

In comparison with the first instance court, it is reasonable to respect the sentencing of the first instance where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing, and the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court determined a sentence that is favorable to the lower court by taking into account the following circumstances: (a) each of the instant crimes committed: (b) each of the instant crimes was committed on two occasions, by providing the Defendant’s access medium to commit the criminal act and assisting the victims to transfer money therefrom; (c) the Defendant withdraws and uses the remitted money first; (d) the Defendant did not reach an agreement with the victims; and (e) the Defendant did not recover from the damage; and (e) the Defendant approved each of the instant crimes; and (e) the Defendant did not have any previous convictions other than the punishment imposed once by fraud; and (e) the total amount of the instant damage was very significant.

The court below determined a sentence in consideration of all the above circumstances, and there is no change in the sentencing conditions different from that of the court below in the first instance.

In addition, comprehensively taking into account the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, and all the sentencing conditions indicated in the instant records and arguments, the lower court’s punishment does not seem to be unfair because it exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion or is too heavy.

The argument that the sentencing of the defendant and the prosecutor is unfair is all rejected.

3. The appeal filed by the Defendant and the prosecutor in conclusion is without merit, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.