All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

The defendant shall acquire money of 250,000 won to Q Q, an applicant for compensation, who is an applicant for compensation.

1. As to the gist of the reasons for appeal, the defendant asserts that the court below's punishment (one year and two months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable, and that the prosecutor is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the judgment of the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(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.

In addition to the circumstances indicated by the lower court, no new circumstance exists to change the sentence of the lower court in the trial, and even considering all of the sentencing factors indicated in the pleadings of the instant case, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and means of crime, and circumstances after the crime, the lower court’s sentencing is too heavy or it is difficult to view that the lower court exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion by putting too heavy.

Therefore, the defendant and prosecutor's argument are without merit.

3. In conclusion, since the appeal filed by the Defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and as to the application for compensation order by Q Q as an application for compensation order filed by the court of the first instance, it is so decided as per Disposition by applying Articles 25(1) and

(However, the late payment damages in the application for compensation order filed by C Q in the trial cannot be regarded as a direct physical damage caused by the criminal act stipulated in Article 25(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings.