Defendant

All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

1. As to the decision of the court below on the summary of the reasons for appeal (six months of imprisonment), the defendant asserts that it is too unreasonable, and the prosecutor asserts that it is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court determined a punishment in consideration of various sentencing factors, including the following: (a) a crime during the period of suspension of execution; (b) a violent crime is repeated; (c) a victim D; (d) an agreement with L; (c) a crime of destroying and damaging property appears to have been recovered; (d) a taxi engineer is not wanting to be punished by the Defendant; (e) a taxi engineer is against his/her mistake; and (e) the motive for

B. Although there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the original judgment as the new sentencing materials have not been submitted in the trial at the original court, and considering the various reasons revealed in the oral proceedings, it does not seem that the sentencing of the lower court is too heavy or it goes beyond the reasonable scope of discretion due to the absence of any change in the conditions of sentencing.

C. Therefore, the Defendant and the prosecutor’s argument of unreasonable sentencing is without merit.

3. As such, the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.