A. The punishment of Defendant 1 (the fine of KRW 10,000,000) sentenced by the lower court is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. The crime of this case is deemed to have committed a crime in light of the crime history, method, and amount of fraud, but it seems that the defendant committed a crime of this case, although it appears that the defendant, in addition to the above apartment, deleted the mortgage established by the defendant for the crime of this case, and the defendant committed a crime of this case. The defendant was aware that it was committed a crime of this case, even though it was committed, the defendant was aware that the defendant exempted the right of this case from the crime of this case, the defendant additionally established the right of collateral on the above apartment, deleted all of the loans extended in excess of the existing apartment as collateral, and caused F similar to D and D to do so by forging the documents required for the loan, such as a letter of delegation of a certificate of seal impression and a written contract to establish a mortgage, etc., or caused F to do so. The defendant to have no criminal record, the defendant's age, character and behavior, the defendant's family relationship, motive, means and consequence of the crime of this case, and the punishment of this case is too excessive or unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, since each appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.