2. The fact that the Defendants were committed by themselves, and that part of the money acquired by the Defendants appears to have been actually used as a down payment to acquire the right to collect earth and rocks, etc. is favorable to the Defendants.

However, in full view of the following facts: (a) the Defendants were punished by imprisonment with prison labor and fines for several times; (b) the amount of damage is considerably large; and (c) the victims did not recover from damage; and (d) the Defendants’ age, sexual conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime; and (e) all the sentencing conditions, such as the crime’s age, sexual behavior, environment, motive, means and consequence; and (e) the scope of the recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines of the Supreme Court sentencing committee for each of the instant crimes is from June to June, it is not recognized that the sentence of the lower court is too unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the Defendants’ appeal is without merit, and all of the appeals are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.