Among them, the part of confiscation against Defendant A shall be reversed.

Proceeds from the sale of No. 2 (Miscellaneous, 200 km) seized evidence.

A. Each sentence sentenced by the court below to the Defendants (Defendant A: imprisonment of one year and eight months; imprisonment of one year and two months; imprisonment of one year and two months; and imprisonment of one year and two months) is too unreasonable.

B. The above punishment, which the court below decided against the Defendants, is too unhued and unfair.

2. Determination

A. In light of the circumstances asserted by the Defendants and the Prosecutor on the grounds of appeal, even if there is no change of circumstances that may be considered in sentencing after the judgment of the court below regarding both parties’ unfair claims for sentencing, and considering the records and arguments of this case, it does not seem that the court below’s punishment against the Defendants is too heavy or too unreasonable.

B. Upon ex officio determination of the forfeiture portion, the lower court, ex officio, confiscated No. 1 (10 tons) of the seized evidence; however, according to the records, it can be acknowledged that it was impossible to sell it, and thus, the confiscation of the confiscated portion is unlawful.

Therefore, among the judgment of the court below, the part that forfeited the above disposal is no longer maintained.

3. In conclusion, the part of the judgment of the court below regarding the confiscation against the defendant A in accordance with Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act shall be reversed ex officio, and the proceeds of sale under Article 7 (1) of the Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone Act and Article 132 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act and subparagraph 2 and subparagraph 3 of the evidence seized pursuant to Article 132 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act shall be confiscated from the defendant A, respectively. The remainder of the appeal by the defendant A, the appeal by the defendant B, and the prosecutor shall be dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that both the appeal by the defendant B,