All appeals filed by prosecutors and defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor (two years of suspended sentence for one year of imprisonment) is too unhued and unreasonable.

B. Defendant 1) misunderstanding of facts (as to the larceny of the facts charged in the instant case), the Defendant did not have any intention to larceny by taking advantage of the victim’s vehicle at the time of the instant case and driving the victim’s vehicle with his own vehicle. Therefore, the lower judgment convicting this part of the facts charged is unreasonable, and it is unjust. 2) The Defendant was in a state of mental disability under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing this part of the facts charged.

3) The above sentence imposed by the lower court on the grounds of unfair sentencing is too unreasonable. 2. The Defendant also asserted the same as the grounds for appeal in this part, and the lower court rejected the above argument and rendered a conviction against the Defendant on the grounds as stated in paragraph (1) of the judgment of the lower court regarding the Defendant’s and counsel’s assertion. In light of the facts acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, the lower court’s aforementioned judgment is acceptable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of mistake is without merit.

3. According to the materials, etc. submitted in the court below's decision as to the defendant's mental suffering claim, it is recognized that the defendant was under the influence of alcohol at the time of the thief crime in this part, but in light of the contents of the thief crime, the behavior of the defendant before and after the crime, the attitude of statement, etc., it seems that the defendant lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions due to drinking at the time of the thief crime, and thus, the defendant's assertion of

4. The grounds for appeal by the Defendant are as follows.