All appeals filed by B, C and Prosecutor are dismissed.

A. Defendant B (1) The amount obtained by mistake of facts is merely about KRW 250,00 per vehicle. (2) The sentence imposed by the lower court of unfair sentencing (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant C’s imprisonment (six months of imprisonment) declared by the lower court is too unreasonable.

C. The prosecutor's decision that the court below sentenced the defendants to the punishment (the defendant B: the defendant C; the defendant C; the defendant D; the defendant D: the probation of the execution of the imprisonment of six months; the defendant E; the probation of the execution of the imprisonment of six months; the defendant F: the fine of five million won; the defendant H: the probation of the suspended execution of two years in October; the defendant I; the probation of the suspended execution of two years in June; and the defendant J: the fine of two million won in fine) are too uneasible.

2. Determination

A. In light of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, i.e., the CJ, an employee of the victim, paid at kg to 10,000 won to 20,000 won per vehicle according to the international high iron price, and as a result, it stated that the average of 25,000 won per vehicle was damaged; ② the defendant also recognized all the facts charged in this case at the court of the court of the court below; ③ the other co-defendants who acquired money by the same method as the defendant also recognized all the above damages, and the fact that the defendant acquired money by deceit can be fully recognized, taking into account the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court of the court below. The defendant's allegation in this part is without merit.

B. As to the assertion of unfair sentencing by Defendant B, C, and the prosecutor, the Defendants deceptioned the victim by forging and using an expressway toll receipt, etc., and the crime is not good. In the case of Defendant B and C, the Defendants are crimes during the suspended execution period, and are disadvantageous to each of the Defendants.