2. We examine the judgment, although the defendants were deemed to have led to the confession of the crime of this case and to repent of their mistakes, the defendants committed the crime of this case in which pseudo petroleum products were manufactured and sold directly by manufacturing pseudo petroleum products at several times, despite the fact that the defendants had been sentenced to a fine pursuant to the sale of pseudo petroleum products, the defendants committed the crime of this case in which pseudo petroleum products were manufactured and sold directly with other defendants, and the quantity and sales amount of pseudo petroleum products manufactured and sold by the defendants together with other defendants, and the crime of manufacturing and selling pseudo petroleum products as in this case is highly harmful to the social and economic aspects, such as disturbance of order in the distribution of petroleum products, aggravation of the performance of automobiles, reduction of national tax revenue due to tax evasion, etc., since such crime is not eradicated, and the punishment therefor is limited to society, and considering all the sentencing conditions as shown in the arguments of this case such as the age, character, and environment of the defendants, motive, means and consequence of the crime, circumstances after the crime, and criminal record relation, etc., the defendants' assertion of unfair sentencing is not justified.

3. In conclusion, the Defendants’ respective appeals are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the Defendants’ respective appeals in this case are without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.