A. Each sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendants (Defendant A and B: 8 months of imprisonment, Defendant C: 6 months of suspended sentence, Defendant D: Imprisonment with prison labor for two years of suspended sentence, Defendant D: 4 months of suspended sentence, and one year of suspended sentence) is deemed too unfasible and unfair.

B. Each sentence imposed by the lower court against the Defendants A and B is too unreasonable.

2. The judgment prosecutor and the defendant A, and the court below, together with the case of the defendant A, examined the unfair sentencing of the sentencing of the two-year period, and transferred the six-year mobile phone access media by opening up to 114 mobile phones. In light of the period and frequency of the crime, the nature of the crime is extremely poor, leading the defendant B and the defendant C to commit the crime of this case, and the degree of participation in the crime of this case is very heavy, such as ordering the defendant C to commit the crime of this case, the fact that the user of the mobile phone was deceiving the owner of the mobile phone, and the damage is not recovered properly even though the damage was considerable, the damage was not recovered properly. According to the fact that there was a lot of crime history, the mother and his spouse were able to properly support the defendant's prior location through an indefinite growth environment, and the fact that eight of the operators of the mobile phone from among the users of the mobile phone and their spouses do not want punishment, the court below led the defendant B and the defendant C to commit the crime of this case for a considerable period of up to 16 years.