2. The judgment of the Defendants recognized the instant crime and against the mistake, Defendant A acquired the sum of KRW 6 million, KRW 4 million, and KRW 10 million in the Defendant B before the commencement of the investigation, Defendant A returned KRW 4 million to the victim prior to the commencement of the investigation, Defendant B returned KRW 7 million in the sum of KRW 3 million, and Defendant A did not have the same criminal record, and Defendant B did not have the first criminal record, and the first criminal record is favorable to the Defendants.

On the other hand, the crime of this case was ordered to receive money under the pretext of arranging the loan by the defendants. The crime of this case is inferior to the nature of the crime by damaging the trust in the fairness of the loan business of the financial institution and disturbing the sound financial order, and the remaining damages have not been recovered to the trial. The court below determined the punishment against the defendant A in consideration of equity in the case of a judgment at the same time as the judgment became final and conclusive with the crime of fraud, and considered the defendants' partial damages have been recovered before the investigation was commenced, and the fact that there was no special change of circumstances is unfavorable to the defendants.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the Defendants’ age, character and conduct, environment, background and consequence of the instant crime, and all of the sentencing conditions indicated in the instant case, such as the circumstances after the commission of the crime, it is deemed that the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable. Therefore, the Defendants’ above assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, since the defendants' appeal of this case is without merit, all of the appeals are dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.