A. The defendants' punishment (the defendants: one year of imprisonment, and one year of confiscation) is too unreasonable.

B. The lower court’s sentence against the Defendants on the prosecutor is too uneasible.

2. The Defendants reflects the Defendants’ mistake, and there is no history of criminal punishment in the Republic of Korea, and Defendant B deposited certain money for the victims, etc. are favorable sentencing conditions for the Defendants.

On the other hand, the crime of this case is a so-called “scam” crime that is systematically and systematically conducted against many and unspecified persons, and is highly likely to cause social harm and injury therefrom, the Defendants’ withdrawal of money deposited in the passbook or transfer to another account making it practically impossible to track the investigative agency, and at the same time, making the principal offenders enjoy criminal proceeds easily, and thus making the victims enjoy criminal proceeds difficult, the victims’ damage recovery was not properly achieved, and the Defendants did not receive the statements from the victims, etc. are disadvantageous to the Defendants.

In full view of all the circumstances that serve as the sentencing conditions specified in the records and arguments of this case, including the Defendants’ age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, and circumstances after the crime, each of the above sentencing conditions against the Defendants is appropriate, and it is recognized that the lower court is too heavy or unreasonable, and thus, the Defendants, their defense counsel, and the prosecutor’s allegation of unfair sentencing is rejected.

3. If so, the appeal by the Defendants 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.