All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) is that the lower court’s punishment of the Defendant is too heavy or (the Defendant) is too heavy.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and where the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). There is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the lower court’s failure to submit new data on sentencing at the trial, and circumstances in which the Defendant and the prosecutor alleged for unfair reasons for sentencing are already reflected in the lower court’s sentencing grounds, and other circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, sex, family relationship, criminal history, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc., as well as various circumstances on which the sentencing specified in the instant records and pleadings, including the circumstances after the crime, and the recommended sentencing measures according to sentencing guidelines, and the scope of punishment [the scope of punishment for each official] [the scope of punishment for a person without any interference with the execution of official duties / [the scope of punishment for six months from June to six months]].

All the arguments of the defendant and the prosecutor are without merit.

3. In conclusion, since the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, all of them are dismissed pursuant to Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition (Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure provides that "the pertinent provision of the law concerning the crime of 1. The application of the judgment below ex officio pursuant to Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure is applicable to the crime of 1.