All appeals filed by B and prosecutor are dismissed.

A. The sentence of the lower court (the first instance court: 2 years of suspended execution in August, and the second instance court: the fine of 5 million won) by Defendant B is too unreasonable.

B. The prosecutor’s first instance court’s sentence (the 2 years and 6 months of imprisonment, and the 2 years of suspended sentence in August) is too unfilled and unfair.

2. Determination

A. In full view of all the sentencing conditions and sentencing guidelines stated in the instant pleadings, including the following: (a) the victim AO of the crime of fraud regarding the prosecutor’s argument against the Defendant A does not want the punishment under the agreement with the Defendant; (b) the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of one year in the period of imprisonment for four months in fraud; (c) the Defendant was not subject to a suspended sentence of one year, but there was no other history of punishment; and (d) the Defendant A had the attitude of recognizing and opposing all his own criminal acts; and (c) the Defendant A’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means, consequence, and consequence of the crime; and (d) all

Therefore, the prosecutor's argument of unfair sentencing against the defendant A is not accepted.

B. Defendant B’s determination on the assertion of unfair sentencing by Defendant B and the Prosecutor’s argument on Defendant B is an unfavorable circumstance to the Defendant, even though there were many criminal records of the same kind, including that Defendant B was punished by imprisonment for March and August 2012 as a crime of fraud, leading to the fraud as indicated in the judgment of the first instance. The crime of forging private documents of this case is not good, and the Defendant has a criminal record of having been punished by imprisonment or a fine.

On the other hand, the crime of fraud in the judgment of the first instance by Defendant B was led by Defendant A, and the economic benefit therefrom seems to have been primarily obtained by Defendant A, and the attitude that Defendant B both recognized and reflected on the crime is favorable to Defendant B.

Defendant B’s age, character and conduct, including the above circumstances.